7 Quick Takes Friday (set #41)

7 Quick Takes Friday

This week: Our culture – Russia has “been there, done that.” Father Barron on Protestantism and authority. Jane Roe (Roe v. Wade) today. Another Planned Parenthood manager switches sides. Margaret Sanger’s dream realized (black genocide). A whisky vending machine. “If you love me / don’t love me…”

— 1 —

While we in the West are fighting feminism, liberalism, secularism, anti-family initiatives, abortion and other population controls…   Russia has “been there, done that.” The results are nothing less than a disaster. They are turning around 180 degrees, hoping it is not too late:

Spotted by Mark Shea

— 2 —

Fr. Barron makes good points on the need for authority in the Church and the problems caused by the lack of it in Protestantism.

— 3 —

“The biggest mistake of my life.” That is how Norma McCorvey describes her role in legalizing abortion. Norma was “Jane Roe” in Roe v. Wade and is a great example of God’s power to convert and heal. Today, she is an active pro-life campaigner. She has also converted to the Catholic Church.

This video is from Virtue Media, an organization much like Catholics Come Home. Both produce videos of the highest quality for locally funded television campaigns around the country. Virtue Media’s cause is pro-life. See their YouTube channel for many more inspiring clips.

— 4 —

Like Norma McCorvey, conversion sometimes comes slowly. Such is the case of Ramona Trevino who managed a Planned Parenthood clinic. While they didn’t perform abortions at her location, it was a feeder of clients to the PP abortuaries. Ramona believed PP’s lies, that they were focused on helping women and that it wasn’t about the money. Over time she knew that simply wasn’t true.

One night, coming back from the clinic, “I was listening to Catholic radio – I remember a woman saying: ‘One day, when we die and we meet our maker, he’s going to ask: “What did you do to prevent and stop abortion??? Right there, it was like a dagger in my heart.” She began praying the Rosary during Lent, and said that on the third day, “the blinders just completely came off my eyes.” She dropped her excuses about working at a non-abortion-facility, and “understood why working for Planned Parenthood was wrong.” “Shortly after, the first 40 Days for Life vigil was held outside the clinic. I got the courage to go out and talk to them, and ask for their prayers.” Trevino says she felt the strength God gave her through the prayers of the pro-life volunteers.

CNA has the story.

— 5 —

Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s founder, had a dream. She spoke of sterilizing those she designated as “unfit,” a plan she said would be the “salvation of American civilization. She also spoke of those who were “irresponsible and reckless,” among whom she included those “whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers.” She further contended that “there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped.” That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment that Sanger considered “unfit” cannot be easily refuted. (source: BlackGenocide.org).

Today, Sanger’s dream is largely fulfilled. Planned Parenthood is an incredible death machine across the country, disproportionately targeting blacks. Her first “family planning clinic” in Harlem has led the way for New York City to be the most dangerous place in America for unborn black babies, killing 60% in the womb. I will never understand why so many black folks support Planned Parenthood and the politicians who worship that evil organization. They have achieved what the KKK could only dream of (excluding the “human weeds” who “never should have been born” from the “race of thoroughbreds” – as Sanger put it).

— 6 —

The good old days…


— 7 —

I really, really don’t want to get into politics here, but this is so over-the-top.

Who do you love? After yet another vacation, Obama has a new plan. Take money by force from those who have earned it (tax) and redistribute it to union workers (construction workers and teachers) whose gratitude is assured (Jimmy Hoffa promised). This is the antithesis of Catholic social teaching, BTW. If you love me…

if you don’t love me, I will find out…


Readers, PLEASE don’t turn me in.

Some random thoughts or bits of information are worthy of sharing but don’t warrant their own full post. This idea was started by Jennifer Fulwiler at Conversion Diary to address this blogging need. So, some Fridays I too participate when I have accumulated 7 worthy items. Thank you Jen for hosting this project!


  1. I especially enjoyed the video about authority in the Church versus the lack of authority or diversity of authority in Protestantism. Every time I hear someone say, “Where is that in the Bible?” or “The Bible says …..,” I want to explain to my interlocutor that while the Bible has truth, it is not the sole source of truth. This video puts that across well.

    I like the Life magazine photo! It makes me laugh.

    Yesterday my cousin posted just about the same clip of President Obama’s recent speech. This was my comment to her: “I admit this [his words about love] sounds weird, yet I think it is unfair for me to pass judgment unless I hear the whole speech and see how these words relate to [the context of] everything else that he said. The clip runs less than a minute!”

    I actually have not yet read or heard much about the content of the plan. But with regard to taxes, don’t all of us who have an income have to pay taxes by force? I mean who would without the fear of being thrown in jail for not doing so? And once taxes are collected, don’t they get distributed in a variety of ways?

    • You make a fair point about context, but I can not imagine a valid one in which our president implores people to support something — not because it is just, sound policy — but because they love him. That is creepy and cultish. It reveals a lot about him. (I assume this “slipped out” because he strayed from the teleprompter. He often gets into trouble when he goes “off script.”)

      On taxes collected by force, I am reminding all of the very nature of taxation and the resulting moral responsibility on how it is spent. I suggest that buying union votes through the confiscation of others’ property is not just. Issues of justice and subsidiarity must always be carefully considered. St. John Chrysostom (Doctor of the Church) offers insight:

      Should we look to kings and princes to put right the inequalities between rich and poor? Should we require soldiers to come and seize the rich person’s gold and distribute it among his destitute neighbors? Should we beg the emperor to impose a tax on the rich so great that it reduces them to the level of the poor and then to share the proceeds of that tax among everyone?

      Equality imposed by force would achieve nothing, and do much harm. Those who combined both cruel hearts and sharp minds would soon find ways of making themselves rich again. Worse still, the rich whose gold was taken away would feel bitter and resentful; while the poor who received the gold form the hands of soldiers would feel no gratitude, because no generosity would have prompted the gift.

      Far from bringing moral benefit to society, it would actually do moral harm.

      Material justice cannot be accomplished by compulsion, a change of heart will not follow. The only way to achieve true justice is to change people’s hearts first – and then they will joyfully share their wealth.

      • In my cousin’s clip, I heard someone from the audience yell out, “We love you” or “I love you.” And then President Obama launched into the “If you love me” bit. So, I think you are correct in saying he went “off script.”

        I’m a bit hazy on how much I can do to make taxes be spent morally. I know there are those who refuse to pay, but I’ve never heard Church leaders advocate such an approach. It seems to me that all I can do is listen to what candidates and elected officials say and then vote for the ones who seem honest or write letters to promote moral choices on how to spend the money. The thing about choices is that there’s not always one correct choice in moral matters. When there is, it’s easy.

        Did I miss something about taxes being used to make everyone economically equal? Is someone trying to take so much money from the rich that they are no longer rich? Is someone trying to give so much money to the poor that they are no longer poor? I’ve never heard anything like that being proposed. As it is, I know my husband and I pay a higher percent of our income in taxes than do those in a lower income level. We are still rather well off, and I choose to think about the words of Jesus who said, “…from those who have more, more will be expected.” I know that’s out of context, but I think it has lots of applications.

        I guess, too, that I thought the taxes that are spent on the disadvantaged in our society simply alleviate the most egregious situations and make it possible for them to get by a little better. I am overlooking the fact that there are cheaters and all that. Corruption, like that has to be dealt with, but not by eliminating help for those in need.

        I wouldn’t mind knowing what prompted St. John to write the words you quoted. He is right. Hearts need changing. I’m not so sure that joyfully sharing wealth would be a consequence, though. That might take a complete heart transplant!

        • It is wrong to withhold taxes and the Church does not advocate that! It does however stress our obligation to participate in the political process. While no candidate is perfect, we have clear guidance from numerous bishops that respecting life has precedence, particularly abortion as it is an “intrinsic evil.” Where 2 candidates have imperfect positions (e.g. one unrestricted “pro-choice” and the other “only upon rape or incest”), we are to choose the one whose policies will result in less innocent deaths. It is of no consequence, BTW, what a candidate says but what he or she does (i.e. “against abortion personally” but has a pro-abortion voting record – only the record is pertinent).

          St. Chrysostom’s quote fits in that it illustrates the extreme of socialist redistribution of wealth. Doing the same, but to a lesser degree, remains immoral and contrary to CST.

          I agree, the quote from Matthew 13:12 is out of context here but disagree that it should be stretched to mean what it does not. Catholic.net notes: “He is referring to spiritual goods rather than material ones.”

          There is a limited role for government in helping the poor. As Catholics, we believe that we (*outside of government*) have an obligation to help them. Big, central government is directly contrary to the Catholic social doctrine of subsidiarity and an imperfect, inefficient and often unjust solution.

Share Your Thoughts