RSS Feed

Tag Archives: Catholic Church

Marrying in ancient, sacred Catholic rites

Posted on

It may seem improper to share to all of you today one of the best and greatest moments of my life, my wedding, especially on a time like this (re: the earthquake crisis in the Visayas). But more than a month after that simple yet historic Filipiniana wedding of ours, news about it came off the press just this morning… so maybe its better if I attempt to offset all the bad vibes besetting the Catholic Church in Bohol and Cebú with this article…

Marrying in ancient, sacred Catholic rites

The bride, wearing the traditional baro’t saya and a long veil topped with a tiara of sampaguita flowers, arrived in a horse-drawn carriage at the San Pedro Apostol Parish Church in San Pedro town in Laguna.

The groom, who sported a black suit that matched his bowler hat and cane, waited for her at the church’s doorstep.

Without the usual wedding frivolities, they exchanged vows—in Spanish—in the Mozarabic Rite of Toledo held on their 14th anniversary as a couple.

Click here for the rest of the story!

Marrying in ancient, sacred Catholic rites

Special thanks to Maricar Cinco for the excellent photo and write-up. :-)

Tridentine Mass Wedding?

Posted on

So much has been said and written about the Tridentine Mass, especially during the previous papacy

…but not much has been said and written about the Tridentine Mass Wedding! :D

Photo courtesy of Dei præsidio fultus.

Coming soon on FILIPINO eSCRIBBLES and ALAS FILIPINAS!

Pass the RH Bill now!

Posted on

Yep. You heard me right. Pass that damned bill right now. As in RIGHT NOW. Anyway, it’s gonna end up like that laughable Clean Air Act — it will join the company of Alf and Mikey Macapagal Arroyo’s horrible showbiz career in the long list of “forgotten memories”. In a few month’s time, nobody’s even gonna give a hoot that it divided this I-just-love-smoochin’-Uncle-Sam’s-candy-a$s-24-hours-a-day-seven-days-a-week banana republic for the past couple ‘o years. Just give it a few months, and those funny internet trolls and haters who have been commenting in defense of the R(oad to) H(ell) Bill in various online articles all over the web will soon discuss the economic merits of breast  implantation, the tantric effects of sex change, and the philosophical satisfaction of mutual masturbation. But the RH Bill?

F that one, man. It’s a law now. We havin’ a good time with Ragnarok and Bang Bros! Woot woot!”

Oh, yes. The RH Bill will do yet another Clean Air ACT. Like this sorry 1999 law as well as countless other legislative disappointments, the RH Bill will never bear fruit. We see ‘em violators every day: plastics burning in backyards and vacant lots lookin’ more like jamboree campsites; buses and jeepneys competing  against each other as to who are the best highway smoke belchers there are; smoke stacks from factories and power plants spewing the blackest smoke all year round, as if hell itself has an entrance from within their edifices.

Anybody been sanctioned?

In the Philippines, laws —not promises— are made to be broken. :D So believe me when I say this: the RH Bill will never be implemented “correctly” nor will it bear fruit the way pro-RH kiddos wanted it to prosper. It will NEVER save our economy, much less help the poor.

Can’t wait to see the look on their faces… so to our beloved congress homies, will ya PUH-LEAZE PASS THAT DARNED BILL ASAP?!!!

Whoa?! Why THIS?! LOL!!! Go figure! ;p

Oh, and one more thing… the only true beneficiaries here would be the authors of the bill. Oooooooooooohh, fat paychecks are comin’ at ya! So don’t say that I didn’t say NO TO RH BILL! I said YES! So please, share me summa da loot!!!

*******

The Promises Have Not Come True

The arrival of oral contraception in the early 1960s and of ‘liberal’ abortion (1967) ushered in the ‘sexual revolution’. Enthusiasts promised this would mean:

—    every child would be a wanted child;

—    illegitimacy and unwanted pregnancy would almost disappear;

—    abortion rates would be low and soon decline;

—    families would be happier and marriages stronger, and;

—    we’d all —especially women— be happier and healthier.

Instead, we have had:

—    ever more unplanned pregnancies;

—    4 million abortions; soaring abortion rates and ever more post-abortion trauma;

—    an unparalleled rise in single motherhood and one-parent families;

—    a surge in sexually transmitted diseases — some of them passed on to babies;

—    women’s bodies having to cope with increasingly powerful chemicals and a serious rise in female infertility;

—    more sex-related crime against women and children;

—    more domestic violence, especially against women, and more teenage crime and violence;

—    rampant pornography, and;

—    declining marriage rates and now 40% of marriages breaking down.

Increased abortion and contraception have been the direct cause of some of these and are related to the others.

Faced with them, the government wants yet more contraception and more abortion — which is like trying to put out fire with petrol?

The truth is that a social experiment, launched in the 1960s, has failed.

(From the book Conspiracy Against Life, 1996, Two Hearts Media Organization, p. 248)

A famous theologian will be Manila’s new archbishop

Posted on

Finally, one of Asia’s leading theologists will soon occupy the throne of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Manila.

MANILA, Philippines — The Vatican has appointed Imus Bishop Luis Antonio Tagle to succeed Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, after the latter’s resignation was accepted by Pope Benedict XVI.

Tagle’s appointment was announced by charge d’affaires Gabor Pinter of the Apostolic Nunciature in Manila and by the Manila Archdiocese.

A known theologian, Tagle is currently the chairman of the Commission on Doctrine of the Faith of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP).

Imus Bishop Luis Antonio Tagle is now Manila's newest archbishop.

The announcement was made just a few hours ago (6:00 PM, Manila time) at the Vatican. The Most Reverend Luis Antonio “Chito” Tagle will soon replace Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales as Manila Archbishop following the latter’s resignation in accordance to canon law. As of this moment, there is still no announcement on when the formal transition will take place.

Like the current leader of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI, the Most Reverend Tagle is a renowned theologian. He currently chairs the Catholic Bishop’s Conference of the Philippines’ Commission of the Doctrine of the Faith. This is like a branch of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (of which Pope Benedict, before becoming Pope in 2005, was its prefect).

In my opinion, having a theologian for an archbishop is a welcome note to the Catholic faithful not only in Manila but in the whole country, especially during these crucial days of RH Bill squabbles that have already divided the nation. It is high time that we have a verbose theologian who can and should explain to pro RH Bill Catholics the reason why the Catholic Church is adamantly against it.

Catholic theologians such as the new Manila Archbishop should deftly explain that the Church’s stand against the RH Bill is not solely rooted in faith and morals alone. In the end, it all boils down to logic. And this is one of the first challenges that the latest Prince-Cardinal should tackle.

Speaking of logic…

Many young Filipino “intellectuals” today who love to make a punching bag out of the local Catholic Church claim to be “lovers” of ideologies and “champions” of liberalism. And that the Church is “out of logic”. They love to “philosophize” and display the many witty quips that they learn from tomes of books they claim to have read. They proclaim themselves as “the new Rizals”. They claim a hatred for mediocrity and “religious superstition”, clamoring for a more intelligent and “freethinking” Filipino. But many of them do all this for the mere heck of it, and not for the purpose of a better society. And now we have social networking. Through these new media they rant and multiply and increase, and they spend hours upon hours in front of their PCs than they do with their pet lizards because they could not get a real job nor could they maintain contact with physical friends (but to them, the words “contact” and “physical” could mean something else). Unfortunately, these kids, for all their intellectual hogwash, have already revealed their characters and self-worth by the choice of words that they use in various online forums. Wittingly or unwittingly, what these bunch of “sucks-to-be-you” kids are doing will only lead this country to anarchy. If they ever win, within a decade or two we will certainly have a transsexual president who will legitimize pole dancing as a school subject. I dare say all of this because I used to think like them — been there, done that. I’ve mingled with so many of these book-toting crybabies back in the 90s. And just thinking about it makes me supersick.

What these “lemme-give-y’all-an-iota-of-my-superb-brain” jactanciosos claim to know about the Catholic Church is so superficial to say the least. All I can say is this: looking back at my brief anti-Catholic self, I just couldn’t believe how stupid I was (a long story that I’ll share one day).

I’m glad that I dealt a lot with logic whenever I flip a page out of a dusty book. Gracias a Dios por este regalo de sabiduría.

So here’s hoping that Manila’s new archbishop will also tackle the increasing number of “pseudo intellectuals” from elsewhere. Not for the Church’s sake actually, but for these proud but hapless kids’.

Enough of my rant. This is about the special Vatican announcement. So please click here to proceed.

Various comments from Mideo Cruz’s sick art

Posted on

“If you just look at artwork and see what offends you, ambabaw mo (you’re shallow-minded).”
Carlos Celdrán

“What sick mind would think that this sacrilegious work promotes Filipino aesthetics, identity and positive cultural values?”
Manila Rep. Amado Bagatsing

“The point is simple: You want to denigrate imams, feel free to do so. You want to make fun of bishops, feel free to do so. But you want to denigrate Islam, or Mohammed, or the Koran, think again. You want to make fun of Christianity, Christ, or the Bible, think again.”
Conrado de Quiros

“It was created by law and funded by our taxes for the purpose of awakening the consciousness of our people to our cultural heritage. Is it our cultural heritage to mock and insult religious personages and icons? Is it aesthetic to vandalize a venerated representation of objects of worship and reverence? Are vulgarity and blasphemy a Filipino value? What Filipino pride can emerge for such works? Is this our national identity? And CCP promotes it?”
Jo Imbong (Executive Director, St. Thomas More Society Inc.)—

Emedeo Cruz (I.N.C.) Sumpain ka, Bakla” and “Bakla Parusahan Ka” (Curse you, fag. You fag, you should be punished).
Hate messages from vandals scrawled across various parts of Cruz’s “artwork”—

My take on this issue? Arnaldo’s recent blogpost pretty much sums up my opinion about Mideo Cruz’s arrogant ignorance and phony artistry. Also, I have this funny feeling that Inquirer columnist Conrado de Quiros, although appearing to be neutral, wouldn’t have written an article regarding this controversy if not for those who vandalized Cruz’s offensive works (“You wreak that, or condone it, what does that say about your beliefs? You wreak that, or condone it, what does that say about your religion?”). In view of his past anti-Church articles, he would have let this Cruz issue go away if not for the vandals.

Imeldific was among the first to react against Cruz's blasphemous and offensive art. CCP, where Cruz's works were exhibited, was a product of hers.

I wish I were a painter. Then I’d paint a picture of Carlos Celdrán, but his nose will be that of a monkey’s prick. Now let’s see how these “intellectuals” and “artists” wannabes will feel about their Dámaso idol being “criticized” through art. If they react negatively, i.e., if they just look at my artwork and see what offends them, ambabaw nilá.

Lucky he, I’m no painter.

150th birth anniversary of José Rizal: but no Spanish is so unRizal

Posted on

Para leer en el destino de los pueblos, es menester abrir el libro de su pasado. —José Rizal—

Krystal at the Rizal Shrine in Ciudad de Calambâ (taken just this morning).

Today, modern Philippine history is making history by celebrating history.

Our nation’s polymath national hero, Dr. José Protacio Rizal Mercado y Alonso Realondo, turns 150 years today, the sesquicentennial anniversary of his birth. The whole archipelago, Filipino communities abroad, and all places of historical significance to Rizal are commemorating his natal day with lavish parties, parades, quiz bees, art and writing contests, and discombobulating speeches from politicians (happy is the “public servant”, indeed, who has been given the chance to grandstand on this very special occasion). There are even rock concerts and “special” appearances of TV personalities to boot.

It is indeed a national event (and international as well since overseas Filipino communities are also celebrating), an event that is reminiscent of the centennial celebration of our country’s “independence” 13 years ago.

During the previous years, I try to make it a point to attend Rizal’s natal day celebration in his hometown of Calambâ, La Laguna. Over the years, I find nothing new, except for the annual themes that nobody cares to enshrine into himself, primarily because they’re either in a foreign language (English) or they’re too over-the-top for an ordinary baker/bus driver/factory worker/saleswoman/mason/office clerk/service crew/etc. to comprehend. This year’s theme is Rizal: Haligi ng Bayan (Rizal: el Pilar de la Nación).

But what I do realize is that the Filipinos are made to appreciate him more and more. The “Love and Idolize Rizal” campaign has been brought outside the classroom is now out in the field, especially in this era of social networking in the internet. Filipinos are now encouraged to travel to places where Rizal had trod. This “appreciation campaign”, however, is focused more on Rizal’s life and loves and travels. Whatever energy that is left to make us appreciate his works is de-emphasized especially since his literary masterpieces are mere translations.

Who reads Rizal?

And that is what I want to rant about on this special day. How come that, in spite of a year-long preparation for his 150th birthday, the Spanish language —the language closest to Rizal’s heart and soul, the language of his mind— is again left out? How will the Filipinos ever have a full and genuine appreciation of his literary masterpieces —all written in Spanish— if they are made to read English and Tagalog translations?

And speaking of literature, there is yet another crisis: who reads Rizal’s work nowadays? And when I say read I mean to say reading for the sake of reading, i.e., enjoyment and pleasure.

On writing about Rizal’s famous novels, National Artist for Literature Nick Joaquín wove it perfectly more than anyone could:

Rizal’s books have been so beatified, so canonized, so enshrined, that they have almost ceased to belong to literature.

Whatever the motives of a writer to produce a work of literary art —be it religious, political, emotional, nationalistic, or just for the heck of it—, the reader’s enjoyment and/or mental gain will matter the most in the end. But in our case, the Filipino is being forced to read Rizal. A work of art, no matter what nationalistic bull it symbolizes, should never be enforced to be seen nor appreciated solely for the purpose of instilling nationalism. That is why this compulsory imposition of Rizal’s works further alienates the national hero from the average Juan de la Cruz.

Rizal law

In that, the late Senator Claro M. Recto had failed. A rabid nationalist and anti-WASP, he (together with Senator José P. Laurel) authored Republic Act No. 1425, more popularly known as the Rizal Law. This law is the reason why college students have Rizal’s Life and Works as a school subject. The opening lines of the law state:

WHEREAS, today, more than any other period of our history, there is a need for a re-dedication to the ideals of freedom and nationalism for which our heroes lived and died…

It should be noted that when this law was authored, the president back then was Ramón Magsaysay. He was well-loved by the masses but was notorious against Filipino nationalists such as Recto because the latter knew that the former had the full-backing of imperialist US (via CIA agent Edward Lansdale). Overwhelmed by imperialist enemies and alarmed by the seeming apathy of the Filipino masses, Recto thought it best to bring back Rizal’s nationalist endeavors to his milieu.

Unfortunately for the nationalist senator, he was barking up the wrong tree.

To begin with, Rizal’s novels were more anti-Catholic than anti-Spanish in nature (hardly nationalist), that is why he was met with opposition from the Catholic Church. The Vincentian friar Fr. Jesús Mª Cavanna argued intelligently that the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo belonged to a different milieu and that teaching them would misrepresent current conditions. It was therefore unwise to enforce the books in schools. But all protestations were ignored. Recto won and his bill was signed into law on 12 June 1956.

A curious section in this law, the first one actually, states that:

Courses on the life, works and writings of José Rizal, particularly his novel Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, shall be included in the curricula of all schools, colleges and universities, public or private: Provided, that in the collegiate courses, the original or unexpurgated editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo of their English translation shall be used as basic texts.

The author(s) mentioned the word unexpurgated. This means that Rizal’s novels should be taught without censoring or amending it. If we are to go into technicalities (which is the wont of most laws and lawyers, if not all), translating his novels from Spanish to English is already tantamount to expurgation. And if taught in translation, the novels can be expurgated. This is evident enough in the numerous Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo textbooks that our schools use.

In this regard, the Rizal Law is, humorously, violating itself.

Rizal and the Spanish language

Truth to tell, although the said law states that English translations shall be used in the teaching of Rizal’s novels, Recto never had the English language in mind especially since this Tiáong native has Spanish as his first language. And being an intellectual and linguist (he reportedly mastered the English language in only three months!), he should have known first hand the dangers of translation. The late Ilonga writer/translator Soledad Lacson vda. de Locsín herself shared her insights into this matter while translating Rizal’s novels into English:

Spanish is a beautiful language; but translated into English literally, it becomes florid and clumsy with its long periodic sentences, shifting tenses and wandering modifiers and, therefore, less comprehensible.

To make the above statement simpler, how many ingenious Tagalog jokes are robbed of its humor when translated into English, and vice versa?

Translation per se is not bad. But oftentimes, it robs the cadence, the emotion, the sparse clarity, the wit, the humor, and the soul of what the original language had wanted to convey. Those who read Rizal through English translations of his novels do not notice the stark sarcasm of the author towards the institutions and persons that he was maligning. Another flaw which Lacon-Locsín had wisely observed was that there seemed to be a “greater pursuit to depict the political and social thoughts of Rizal’s time in the context of the translator’s milieu rather than simply to tell the story of a different world in a different time.”

Although translations have to be in tandem with the semantics of the age in which they are read to be appreciated, my own personal view is that they should, as much as possible, capture much of the nuances and cadence of the period in which they had been written; even at the risk of sounding awkward or stilted.

And how can the nuances and cadence of Rizal’s period be captured? By “capturing” Rizal’s mind. And how to capture this still mysterious mind?

There is a key: the Spanish language, of course.

We always quote Rizal: “To foretell the destiny of a nation, it is necessary to open the book that tells of her past.” But reading our past through translations is never enough. And it is not giving justice to Rizal whenever we read his poems, novels, and essays in English/Tagalog. English is so foreign to him as Swahili is so distant to us. In order to understand Rizal fully, it is necessary to capture the nuances of his genius.

Not only that, by learning Spanish we will uncover more about ourselves. We shall be able to, at last, open the book that tells us of our past. Our real past. Already, the small amount of “Spanish evidence” that we have is shedding much light about who we are and what we were. What more if we are able to salvage more than 13 million documents stocked in the National Archives, written in Spanish, waiting to be “decoded”?

Hopefully, our nation’s leaders will make something that is significantly historic: by fully reintegrating the Spanish language back into our lives. In doing so we will be able to understand what Rizal was all about, what his motives were, his emotions and attitude towards everything he tackled, and why he truly deserves to be called el pilar de nuestra nación.

*******

My Facebook photos of Rizal@150.

Nothing has changed — the Vatican is still against condoms

Posted on

“Optimum legum interpres consuetudo.”

The sixth commandment in the Old Testament says “You shall not kill”. Even if in some ways the New Testament has superseded the Old Testament, the rule did not change: do not kill.

This applies to many cases, but relatively. In the case of a war, if, for instance, a journalist asks Pope Benedict XVI for a comment, the pontiff will certainly condemn it no matter who the aggressor or defender is. The pope will condemn all motives (final cause) for war, all participants in the senseless killing, most especially all agents involved: guns, bombs, fighter planes, bullet-proof vests, etc.

Speaking of bullet-proof vests, it is a brilliant invention made to protect the life of war participants against firearm-fired projectiles and shrapnels. These vests are made available in the war market. All items in the war market are condemned by the Vatican because they are all involved in carrying out war.

But war is already taking place. Not even the Swiss Guards will be able to stop the warring factions. Wouldn’t it be “madness” for the Vatican to forbid the use of bullet-proof vests?

Pope Benedict XVI would have certainly answered thus: “There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a soldier uses a bullet-proof vest, where this can be a first step in the direction of saving a life, which is HIS life, a first assumption of responsibility, for it will prolong his true mission on earth, one of which is not to kill”.

The same line of reasoning can be argued regarding the pope’s remark on condom usage only made controversial by an irresponsible media and many a sex-starved individual who frivorously twisted the said remark to justify their unjustified interests.

In a recent interview that journalist Peter Seewald had with the German pontiff regarding condoms and the spread of AIDS in Africa, the Catholic leader said that the use of condoms could be seen as “a first step toward moralization,” even though condoms are “not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection.”

A confused Seewald asked for more clarification: “Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?”

The pope’s answer: “It of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.”

Although the pope in particular and the Vatican in general did not change the Catholic ban on contraceptions such as condoms, the pope’s remarks to Seewald was, sad to say, greeted as a “breakthrough” by liberal Catholics and pro-choice activists. But this “breakthrough” that they claim is nothing more but a type of unrepresentative generalization. And their claim that the Vatican has finally softened its stand on condom use is purely anecdotal evidence.

Drawing an analogy from the “war commentary” mentioned earlier, to say that the pope is 100% OK with the sale and usage of bullet proof vests to protect human life from bullets and shrapnel in times of war is tantamount to saying that he is OK with war itself. Of course not. That would have been contradictory to the Church’s stand against war and the taking of another life. Therefore, to claim that the pope has finally OKd condom usage is to say that he is now OK with pre and extramarital affairs, an absurd scenario.

And besides, the media has been very selective of the pope’s remarks. They have only allowed to publish what the boisterous pro-choice people had wanted to hear all along, thus killing the entire context altogether. But if pro-condom advocates are to read the full transcript of what the biased media had made controversial, they will get a different idea, far different from what they have claimed to be a victory:

Peter Seewald: On the occasion of your trip to Africa in March 2009, the Vatican’s policy on Aids once again became the target of media criticism. Twenty-five percent of all Aids victims around the world today are treated in Catholic facilities. In some countries, such as Lesotho, for example, the statistic is 40 percent. In Africa you stated that the Church’s traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Church’s own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.

Pope Benedict: The media coverage completely ignored the rest of the trip to Africa on account of a single statement. Someone had asked me why the Catholic Church adopts an unrealistic and ineffective position on Aids. At that point, I really felt that I was being provoked, because the Church does more than anyone else. And I stand by that claim.

Because she is the only institution that assists people up close and concretely, with prevention, education, help, counsel, and accompaniment. And because she is second to none in treating so many Aids victims, especially children with Aids.

I had the chance to visit one of these wards and to speak with the patients. That was the real answer: The Church does more than anyone else, because she does not speak from the tribunal of the newspapers, but helps her brothers and sisters where they are actually suffering.

In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.

As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work.

This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being.

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection.

That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.

Peter Seewald: Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

Pope Benedict: She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality. (from Seewald’s latest book Light of the World, The Pope, The Church and The Signs Of The Times which was published last month)

Canon law and Church law, particularly those that deal with human life and sexuality, cannot be altered just like that, especially not in an interview. So when in doubt, always remember that custom is the best interpreter of the law. It has never been the custom of the Catholic Church to advocate the banality of sex. And in view of the foregoing excerpt, I believe enough has been said. So Congressman Edcel Lagmán better shut up for a while, the way he always does anyway whenever he is caught in a predicament in debates with Congressman Roilo Gólez regarding the RH bill.

Unfortunately, the damage has been done. Many people with childish logic have already believed that the Pope has approved condom use. So let us just be wary and extra cautious the next time around. Keep in mind that media is the most effective way to influence the greatest number of people in the shortest posible time and is the key to any advocacy campaign. Conspirators against life know this perfectly. Let us not fall prey next time.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 779 other followers

%d bloggers like this: