The fact that more and more we are inundated with bureaucratic petty rules like extensive no-smoking zones around the perimeters of buildings and so forth while the very laws of human life - which are not arbitrary, for human life is sacred - are simply "removed", or done away with, which is ultimately to pretend they are abolished by enforcing a damn lie that we can actually do such things, when we can't - this fact, this starkly amazing insanity doesn't really seem to dawn on people today. It doesn't make them stop for a second to think about what is going on. For people today it is nothing more than another animal motion - it's simply amoral. It's just some kind of amorphous progression. Like the way fornication is viewed today: it's just an amoral animal motion. Kicking a puppy will land you in trouble with the authorities. Smash some eagle eggs and it's to the gulag for you. But deciding that killing someone who wants to be killed is now suddenly "legal" - that's just, you know, just decided: they decided amorally that it is an amoral decision concerning a matter that is entirely amoral. It is amoral because we are amoral (or at least we would like to pretend); we are neither moral or immoral; we are amoral, like walking across a busy street while looking at your smart phone is just an amoral animal motion. Or like taking a selfie. And you vil take ze selfie or vee vil beat your ass with ze selfie stick!
So watch out, boys and girls. They could decide at some point that you need "terminal assistance". By what standards? Well, glad you asked: their own standards. They are the Supreme Court after all. Their boundless compassion will go so far as to insure you are not burdening the economy by going without terminal assistance. No, every person deserves to receive their compassion!
How did our country ever get along without their mighty and far-reaching latter-day benevolent rulings? We've been bound hand and foot until these former lawyers came along and donned flowing robes. Oh, the pain is ending! The Supreme Court is here! Hurray! The
3 comments:
Well, I wrote to the PM about it last week (didn't use those words, but you get the idea).
Fr. Hunwicke is fond of quoting the First Vatican Council: "the Holy Spirit was not given to the successors of Peter that they might reveal new doctrine"; I wonder if it'd do any good to remind everyone that the Holy Spirit was not given to the Supreme Court of Canada at all?
LOL. I shouldn't be laughing, but I am, because that was funny - and true. I was made aware of O'Brien's article at lifesitenews only after writing this post. He says everything about it way better. But I found it funny that he also mentions their robes.
I wonder, do you think there is any hope of a chance that Parliament will stand against the Supreme Cort on this?
I heard some CBC voices speculating that the likely Government move would be to let the 12 months expire, by which time there will have been new elections and a new Parliament.
And I think that would be a disaster (I'm also kind-of thinking the best way for the next election to go would be a Liberal minority with a BQ opposition squeezing out the NDP again, and Conservatives holding "balance of power". Which would be weird. But it doesn't seem likely.)
On the other hand, I also don't think the CBC really "gets" the current Parliament (nor do they like them... which might be mutual... is there a better somewhere to hear current events? CPAC is hard to follow...)
But where there's life, there's hope (and need of vittles); so let's keep living and writing and Sunday-feasting; and hope.
Post a Comment