Yes, he's a clown, but he's a clown with the ability to severely and asymmetrically blind side the USA.
I hope he waits until I get back from my holiday in Italy on 10th August. Things do seem to be escalating. The problem is who can put the brakes on all of this? China? Dont' think so!
My wife and daughter will be in Fatima till August 21. So nothing will be happening before that! Except an Eclipse in the USA.
Maybe, I never thought of 'Annihilation' as something we could quibble over. annihilation ənʌɪɪˈleɪʃ(ə)n/ noun 1. complete destruction or obliteration. "the threat of global annihilation"
I don't mean to nit-pick, but if one considers a 'nation' to be a grouping of a particular type of people within defined borders, this entity might well be considered to be 'annihilated' or 'obliterated' if occupied overwhelmingly by people from outside. For example, the demographers tell us that if present trends continue, there will be six million Italians left in Italy by the end of this century. Where will the Italian nation be in the face of an estimated population of four billion in Africa alone? I know it's semantics, but the following definitions of 'annihilate' are available: destroy utterly; obliterate. "a simple bomb of this type could annihilate them all" synonyms: destroy, wipe out, obliterate, wipe off the face of the earth, wipe off the map, kill, slaughter, exterminate, eliminate, liquidate, eradicate, extinguish, finish off, erase, root out, extirpate It is not entirely implausible that the Italian nation could be described as extinguished if the above future befalls it. The destruction would not have been via bomb, but abortion, contraception and barren lifestyle. A slower, less spectacular violence, but just as deadly.
This is exactly my (clumsily made) point, de Gaulle. Thank goodness, in the end, it was the Gards choice (that, I believe was a real moment of grace when they surrendered) and not the state's. However this has played right into the hands of the euthanasia gang - doctors and nurses at GOSH have received death threats and continue to receive anonymous death threats. Pro-lifers are calling the judge a murderer. I do not want to see this black and white, polarised culture war escalate on the streets of Britain and see decent people of goodwill killed and attacked because of this confusion. And of course, we know who the author of confusion is, and who will delight in all of this.
It goes without saying that not every employee in the NHS is perfect, Dolours. I would struggle to identify any organisation that manages to recruit only perfect human beings since we do live in a fallen world. I think the judge was not trying to decide whether the NHS is perfect, but whether the medical experts were right to say they could do no more for the baby and whether it was in the child's best interests to allow him to die naturally. The premise that you can only get what you pay for is contrary to the vocational mission of the healthcare system in this country. That is what makes it uniquely good. It was set up, to use a Catholic phrase, for "The Common Good" and to ensure that the poor and disadvantaged are cared for. The idea that you can only have a say in what is good if you are wealthy militates against the very values that the NHS stands for. (It also goes against Gospel values of love of neighbour) We all pay for it and we all benefit from it, whether we are sick or healthy. Some people rarely need to use the NHS throughout their entire lives, but you would find it hard to find people resenting that their taxes are used to pay for it.(similarly, I rarely need to use the police, but I am very happy that my taxes go to fund this service for the common good of everyone, likewise all public services). As to whether GOSH would have gone to the same lengths to prevent him getting experimental treatment if Charlie were the son of a rich person, I think is irrelevant. You may be aware that his parents had raised over a million pounds to get him a chance of experimental treatment. They had the money. Money was not what was preventing them. I think ( and I am only surmising here) that if you asked the medical experts at GOSH " would you have gone to court if this had been the child of a celebrity millionaire" I think those doctors would say that they prioritise firstly the benefit to the child and regardless of their social background, would look at the MRI scans, the notes, the probability of further treatment and they would make an ethical judgement based only on that. They have no vested interest at all in disadvantaging poor children and of course, it is entirely down to the care and expertise of these good people that Charlie survived for so long. I also imagine that there are many more cases similar to the Gards where parents are given the news that their child is terminally ill and there is nothing more medically that can be done, only palliative care, where the parents accept the situation. I wonder if in this case, GOSH might have been more sensible to have helped the GARDS get Charlie to his "experimental treatment" in February, rather than drag the whole thing out in this unhelpful court saga. However they would say they were doing what they believed was the most loving thing for the baby. What counts against them is that their legal representation had a record of being pro-euthanasia. Not good at all.
I totally agree. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary "annihilate" has multiple meanings as a transitive verb: to cause to cease to exist, to do away with entirely so that nothing remains; to destroy a considerable part of; to defeat overwhelmingly; to cause to be of no effect or nullify, e.g. "a right to freedom that cannot be annihilated"; to destroy the substance or force of, e.g. "fear can annihilate one's confidence"; to regard as of no consequence; to cause to vanish or cease to exist by coming together and changing into other forms (the last one has to do with physics but surely the idea could also apply to a nation, as a people of a common identity?).
Cutti Cutting to the chase, your last few sentences pinpoint the crux of the matter. A HUGE mistake was made, and GOSH and the courts perpetuated the evils until it was too late. The parents' hands were tied and they could not make decisions for their own child. That is the whole thing summed up in a nutshell, without any other words necessary. I was not the member of the forum who posted the remark about murder, by the way.
I believe a case of tearing away the parents' rights over their child also occurred in the recent past between two different hospitals in neighboring states. One I think was MA. The parents disagreed with a diagnosis of a hospital physician who was claiming a psychological element to the child's condition which was different from a former diagnosis and the parents had another expert of their own who also disagreed with this rather inexperienced hospital physician. The child was then placed in a kind of hospital psych unit which caused deterioration of the child's condition. When parents got more concerned they eventually had their rights, I think even for visits, taken away.....seemingly to save face for the doctor's new evaluation. Somehow it eventually got switched back to the other state and child went home but not before a lot of unnecessary damage had been done....to all. When you think how such things can happen in what are called "health care" facilities....it is a mad, mad world. Same when courts agree with "providers" that sticking sharp instruments into the delicate regions of a woman who is perfectly healthy with a pregnancy.....as somehow "for the woman's health", and those who attempt to really look out for the woman and who wish to give her all of the complete and truthful facts become the bad guys, well, the world no longer has a conscience. It has been reported that the elderly in the Netherlands aren't going to see doctors and esp. are afraid of being admitted to hospitals for fear of never getting out due to the "mercy killing" ideology there. The reasons for being considered expendable or no longer useful....IOW, trash.....are only growing....esp. with the new technology that allows for the throw away society to extend to new human creation, "perfecting" it for what exactly? Certainly not love.
We need leadership from somewhere regarding these life issues which are going to become increasingly common. Unfortunately, we don't appear to be receiving much clarity from the hierarchy. A laissez-faire situation whereby well-intentioned, but ill-informed lay people act according to their emotions is only likely to do harm to the pro-life cause. There is a Protestant lady, Lydia McGrew, who writes on the website 'What's Wrong With the World' and who seems to have a great command of these end-of-life issues. Her views don't seem to deviate in the slightest from what I am aware of Catholic teaching on these issues. I'd recommend her highly. Hospitals are increasingly becoming places for the old to avoid as much as they can. They run the risk of either being passively killed by neglect or actively murdered. Perhaps a living will making it unambiguously clear that one does not wish to be 'assisted' to the afterlife might be of some use. Regardless, unless we knowingly and intentionally co-operate, they can only harm our bodies. When we're old, at least we'll have had a life, unlike the poor aborted babies.
Ooh! Ooh! Is it possible that more of the retire fireman's, Mark Taylor's, "Trump prophecy" is taking place amidst all of the "other side's" continuing harassment? In some messages our Lady has said that she would give us a leader who would try to end abortion if we would seriously ask...and she has said that she would raise up certain individuals who would be lights.....and we should watch for them!! Bible Studies at the White House: Who's at the Heart of This Spiritual Awakening? WASHINGTON – A spiritual awakening is underway at the White House. Some of the most powerful people in America have been gathering weekly to learn more about God's Word, and this Trump Cabinet Bible study is making history. They've been called the most evangelical Cabinet in history – men and women who don't mince words when it comes to where they stand on God and the Bible. ... Ralph Drollinger of Capitol Ministries told CBN News, "These are godly individuals that God has risen to a position of prominence in our culture." They're all handpicked by President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. "I don't think Donald Trump has figured out that he chained himself to the Apostle Paul," Drollinger laughed. more..... http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politic...whos-at-the-heart-of-this-spiritual-awakening
Further to my comments on end-of-life issues, we need to be aware that there is enormous potential for abuse, and apparently some such abuses have been documented, with organ donations. It is highly desirable that organs be taken from as healthy a patient as possible, one whose heart and circulatory function are still optimum. Obviously, this presents considerable temptation to the organ harvestors. Can they be relied on not to jump the gun? Where wealthy recipients are involved, the potential for corruption also exists. A fallen world is not very suitable for playing God.
Yes, DeG. I changed my status a few years back to a non-organ donor. I want my death to be as natural as possible, if it is up to me. Husband and I have advanced directives as well. No organ donation....scary that maybe God might want that dying person to live, not to be rushed off to the Eternal because someone needs an organ.
