Finnegan on traditional values

Dear Reader: A reminder, if you go further, you have chosen to read a blog by Finnegan on Traditional Values. Values that are time tested, and not secular and revisionist. Nothing more traditional than LIFE and FAMILY issues. Those who disagree proceed at your own peril.

Recently Gay columnist Daniel Villarreal made clear the real truth behind the homosexual agenda. That being, acceptance of the homosexual life choice as a good one. More alarming, raising our children for us regarding acceptance of same. How do we know this you ask, by his statement of May 18, 2011, "I and a lot of other people want to INDOCTRINATE, recruit, and expose children to queer sexuality, AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!

Nothing wrong with taking the God given responsibility from parents as to how how their faith directs them to raise their children? Did I hear correct, this sounds like something eminating from Iran not America.

What a novel idea Daniel is pushing; the responsibility of parents to offer the religious and moral education of their minor family members being given to those selling a life choice that the parents consider dangerous, disease prone, and sinful. Sure Daniel, and we have a bridge in Brooklyn we would like to sell you.

What is even more interestintg is that our homosexual activists, a small percentage of a small percentage of our population, have consistently denied that they want to indoctrinate (Villarreal's word) our children. DV goes on to say "We need to educate and teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality, (notice always someone elses children) our very future depends on it."

This is the crux of the matter to many who would opt out of any teaching of a life choice their faith and values strongly disagree with. The deeply held religious beliefs of over 2000 years with over twelve seperate teachings we find included in both the old and new Testament of the Bible.

Now let us look at how the acceptance of faux "marriage" effects this situation. In our summer home Illinois, shortly after votes were taken in the lame duck session, politicians leaving office voted for civil unions for homosexuals by a plurality of 4. All from those leaving office, all who had run on keeping marriage, one man, one woman. Civil unions, the same as "marriage" in all but name and its approval on the federal level. Obama already after that one in trying to end the federal defense of marriage law. Shortly after the approval of CU in Illinois, their demand for marriage in name also has begun, as they use the "seperate but equal" argument.

Weeks after the civil unions law took place, Senator Heather Steans introduced SB1619, a poorly written "comprehensive sex ed bill." An effort to normalize sexual immorality and perversion by inculcating children regarding the acceptance of the homosexual life choice as a good choice. Daniel Villarreal had to be smiling from lip to lip on this one.

Begin to get the connection? Once civil unions, and "marriage" are accepted, then the sex education, and health classes in our public schools begin to take over for our parents, and their children are being raised for them. No opt out, or opt in allowed my friends. Google David Parker Boston Massachusetts to see this. Let me give you just a few of the contents that Senator Stean's bill included once civil unions was passed.

BOYS AND GIRLS AGE 5-8: Keep in mind the age range as you read this.

"Some people are homosexual which means they can be attracted to, and fall in love with, someone of the same gender.' "Two people may decide to marry each other because they love each other." "Touching and rubbving ones own genitals to feel good is called masturbation." "Vaginal intercourse is when a penis is placed inside a vagina."

I would think that almost all would feel that information such as this does not belong in a class of ages 5-8 years old. The oft said, "let the children be children" surely applies here. Most of all, the childs parents are most capable of when information such as this is given to their youngest of children; not the state, or a school system often beholden to the homosexual lobby and an accomodating meda.

In closing, let me give you even more startling news, after the homosexual community deeply wounded our Catholic faith with a very small number of homosexuals admited to the seminary. History showed that in spite of taking a vow of celibacy, they continued to practice their homosexuality, many with younger children. We now see this disgusting practice continue outside the Church by the homosexual community. Two open and clear examples are NAMBLA AND MAP. NAMBLA stands for North American Man Boy Love Association. while the newer effort MAP, stands for Minor Attracted People. Better truthfully stated, Minor attracted pedophiles.

A recent meeting in Baltimore of the MAP group "B4 You Act," was observed by two family advocates for concerned parents. Shockingly it revealed homosexual activists efforts to mimic homosexual lobby tactics to legitimize pedophilia. The argument they suggested using, was "we were born that way." Exactly part of the talking points that the homosexual community fiercely defends in their argument for broad acceptance including "marriage" Born with a proclivity towards sex with children! Can anyone swallor that claim. Meanwhile both NAMBLA and MAP work toward lowering the age of consent for sexual activity to in some countries as low as 12 years old!

The danger of marriage for homosexual goes back to what is best for children. Very few argue that all else being even, studies show convincingly that children do far better as they grow into adults with the unique and seperate teaching skills that belong to father and mother. Almighty God gave us the best way when HE created man and woman, HIS way of continuing HIS people from generation to generation. The complementary nature of the anatomy of God's work show this clearly.Never have the words, "Be careful for what you wish for, you just may get it," been more accurate when it applies to MARRIAGE and whats best for the children.


  • Print

Comments » 4

MIOCENE (Inactive) writes:

"Almighty God gave us the best way when HE created man and woman"

There is no objective evidence that some "almighty god" created man and woman.

Your absolute beliefs and traditions are just a function of parents and clergy who programmed these beliefs into your head starting in childhood and continuing through high school.

If Finnegan was switched at birth and given to Muslim Parents; he would today be spouting the Koran; as absolute truth.

His religion is therefore nothing more then an accident of birth; and since his religious traditions are valid only within its own scripture; any universal absolutes stemming from such scripture; -are invalid.


MIOCENE (Inactive) writes:

"the homosexual community deeply wounded our Catholic faith with a very small number of homosexuals admited to the seminary."

REALLY Finnegin?

Many find it impossible to believe that the Virgin Mary or the angels would watch a child being raped, while jumping up and down, flapping their wings shouting "FREE WILL, FREE WILL", thereby relieving themselves and the Holy Spirit of all responsibility.

Sex abuse of children and corruption in the Church negates the Church's claim of DIVINE INSPIRATION, reducing the Church to nothing more than a political institution; deriving its power through the use of SPIRITUAL POLITICS; backed up by a stock portfolio.

One cannot compare the percentage of abuse in the Church to that of secular institutions (which many Catholics do) without making it “COMMON” to those institutions, and putting into doubt the assumed divine origin of the Catholic Church.

You cannot put the church on a pedestal during the GOOD TIIMES, and then take it off later to justify negative behaviour through (say)“free will“.

It is either one or the other; an institution inspired by god, or it is NOT. The Catholic has to make up his mind.

The Church is supposedly guided by the Holy Spirit. THAT"S what makes it different from Secular Institutions; and leaves the Church with NO EXCUSE; unless of course the whole religion is nothing more than an elaborate hoax from the beginning; with its roots in exaggeration, hallucination, self delusion and lies.

A common ESCAPE HATCH used by the Church is when their individuals do GOOD, they say they were guided by the Holy Spirit, if the individuals do BAD the church says FREE WILL.

So here the Catholic Church plays the game of: Heads I win, TAILS I win; as the Church keeps Finnegan snapping at the dangling carrot of eternal salvation; a carrot which he is never going to taste.

MIOCENE (Inactive) writes:

Here are some examples of the truths and traditions of FINNEGAN'S Catholic Church.

Keep in mind that the Church was supposedly GUIDED by the holy spirit from the beginning.

In the first century the truth was that women were accepted with equal status in the fledgling Christian religion(s). After 325 the truth was that they weren’t.

In the ll th century a criminal could get into heaven by dieing for the pope on the battlefield.
In the 12th cen. Pope Innocent III said that the killing of an embryo that was not yet “animated” was not murder. .

In the 13th cent Pope Gregory IX declared housecats as diabolical, leading Catholics to torture and kill house cats for centuries almost eliminating all cats in Christiandom.

In the 1400s the truth was that one could “buy” his way into heaven by giving money to the church.
In the 15th century the devil could be driven out of a sexually active young girl with a hot poker placed appropriately. More truth

Thomas Aquinas wrote in his "Summa Theologica": quest. 92; that “women are intellectually inferior, they were created for males, and are the result of defects in the male seed”. More truth accepted by the Church.

In the 15th, 16th, and 17 centuries women were tortured and died screaming over slow fires as part of the Church‘s never-ending quest to validify the existence of the Devil, and condemn women as the "killers of Christ" (St. Tertullian)

Now, one might say that the Church had to EVOLVE.
REALLY? Did the Morality of the Holy Spirit ALSO have to evolve through the centuries?

FINNEGAN'S Church does not and never did qualify as a Moral Teacher.

Morality has always preceded the Church, and in the wake of the advancement of human rights, the church quietly moves in from behind and assumes the credit; like letting the peasants starve for centuries; and in the wake of modern Progressive Government; moves in later and opens up “soup kitchens”; and assumes the role of the benevolent Christ.

All religions; most specifically the VATICAN; are Dictatorships.

TODAY the Catholic dictators are BENEVOLENT dictators but it WASN'T always that way; and there is no guarantee that it will remain so.

Although the Vatican no longer condones torture; there is no guarantee that it cannot resume its grisly practices of the past; simply because the validity for doing so is still entrenched within its dogma.

These horrors have never been legislated out of Catholicism. They have become dormant in the wake of Liberal advancements in human rights.

If the Vatican ever regains the power it had in the past; it will again wind its way through a myriad of early Church writers; or Fathers of the Church; to again justify the red hot poker and the breast ripper.

Finnegan's Catholic Church is a sleeping horror. Do not underestimate its potential for savagery.

Beware what lies behind the warm smiles, charisma, and kind words of the Catholic Clergy.


MIOCENE (Inactive) writes:

Now let's take a look at FINNEGAN'S so-called "sacred" institution of marriage:

Here are some interesting facts about marriage and the Christian Church:

It took the CATHOLIC CHURCH almost 1500 years to fully recognize God's establishment of "marriage as an institution"
Until then; the Church was so ANTI SEX; that it would rather that people remain unmarried.

Marriage was seen as an excuse to have legal sex; SEX; which the early Church Fathers found disgusting.

Saint Paul had suggested that marriage be used only as a last resort by those Christians who found it too difficult to remain chaste.

The Fathers of the Church with their profound hostility toward sex, agreed that marriage could not be a true and valuable Christian vocation.
ie. Church Father Tertullian argued that marriage "consists essentially in fornication" (An Exhortation to Chastity")

"Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage said that the first commandment given to men was to increase and multiply, but now that the earth was full there was no need to continue this process of multiplication. "

"St. Augustine was clear that if everybody stopped marrying and having children that would be an admirable thing; it would mean that the Kingdom of God would return all the sooner and the world would come to an end"

"This negative view of marriage was reflected in the lack of interest shown by the Church authorities."
"Although the Church quickly produced liturgies to celebrate Baptism and the Eucharist, no special ceremonial was devised to celebrate Christian marriage, nor was it considered important for couples to have their nuptials blessed by a priest."

"People could marry by mutual agreement in the presence of witnesses. This system, known as Spousals, persisted after the Reformation."

"The first detailed account of a Christian wedding in the West dates from the 9th century and was identical to the old nuptial service of Ancient Rome"

So it took the Christian Church at least 800 years to BEGIN taking marriage seriously; very odd for an institution supposedly inspired by the Holy Spirit.

In my opinion; marriage eventually took on a useful purpose to cement relationships between Catholic heads of state in order to form "Holy Alliances" thereby securing Vatican power in Europe.
Meaning that Christian marriage had it roots in politics; not morality.

So don't take this "sanctity of marriage stuff" so seriously. It's all rubbish; like most of the stuff they filled our heads with in Catholic School.


Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.