Allergy Associates - The Involved Citizen

Please visit the following website and other Asthma-DrSprecace.Com pages for excellent and up-to-the-minute daily news and commentary regarding this vital issue and all the legal and political activity going on. And please ACT on the information that you gain here. Thank you. GS

THE LAST SIX WORDS THAT CROSS AN ATHEIST'S MIND OR LIPS AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH: THANK GOD I DIED AN ATHEIST".

GS

A must read and great analogy of God vs Science. Enjoy

'Let me explain the problem science has with religion.'The atheist professor of
philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to
stand.

'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'
'Yes sir, 'the student says.

'So you believe in God?'
'Absolutely.

Is God good?'

'Sure! God's good.'

'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'

'Yes'

'Are you good or evil?'

'The Bible says I'm evil.'

The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible! He considers for a moment.
'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure
him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?'

'Yes sir, I would.'

'So you're good...!'

'I wouldn't say that.'

'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of
us would if we could. But God doesn't.'

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't, does he?
My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to
heal him.. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?'

The student remains silent.. 'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says. He
takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.
'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'

'Er..yes,' the student says.

'Is Satan good?'

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'

'Then where does Satan come from?'
The student falters. 'From God'

'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this
world?'

'Yes, sir..'

'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'

'Yes'

'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then
God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our
works define who we are, then God is evil.'

Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred?
Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'

The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'

'So who created them?'

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. 'Who
created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to
pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. 'Tell me,' he continues
onto another student. 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?'
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'

The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use to identify
and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?'

'No sir. I've never seen Him.'

'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'

'No, sir, I have not..'

'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you
ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'

'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'

'Yet you still believe in him?'

'Yes'
'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science
says your God doesn't exist... What do you say to that, son?'

'Nothing,' the student replies.. 'I only have my faith.'

'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science has with
God. There is no evidence, only faith.'

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own.
'Professor, is there such thing as heat?'

'Yes.

'And is there such a thing as cold?'
'Yes, son, there's cold too.'
'No sir, there isn't.'

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly
becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 'You can have lots of heat,
even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat
or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit down to 458
degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.
There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the
lowest -458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or
transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit
energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold
is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold.
Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the
opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.'

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a
hammer.

'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'

'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation.. 'What is night if it isn't
darkness?'

'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of
something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light,
but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness,
isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness
isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a
good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'

'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start
with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can you
explain how?'

'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains... 'You argue
that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are
viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir,
science can't even explain a thought.' 'It uses electricity and magnetism, but
has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the
opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a
substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.'
'Now tell me, professor.. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a
monkey?'

'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of
course I do.'

'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the
argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even
prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your
opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has
subsided. 'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student,
let me give you an example of what I mean..' The student looks around the room.
'Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?' The
class breaks out into laughter. 'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the
professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's
brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of
empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain,
with all due respect, sir.' 'So if science says you have no brain, how can we
trust your lectures, sir?'

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face
unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I Guess
you'll have to take them on faith.'

'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,' the
student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?' Now uncertain, the
professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it Everyday. It is in the daily
example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in The multitude of crime and violence
everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'

To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not
exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness
and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did
not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's
love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat
or the darkness that comes when there is no light.'

The professor sat down.

If you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when you
finished, mail to your friends and family with the title 'God vs. Science'

PS: the student was Albert Einstein.
Albert Einstein wrote a book titled God vs. Science in 1921.

AND NOW...THE MODERN HOLOCAUST

What else can we call a nation-wide, systematic and intentional destruction of individuals for the sole reason that they exist and are "inconvenient" to the majority of their fellow human beings? Now add to that scenario the fact that the majority of those victims are of one ethnic group. What do you have? The abomination of ABORTION is what you have, where over 90,000 individuals were killed in New York City alone in 2010 - and where the large majority of those were Black babies. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the most dangerous place for a Black person to be is in the womb. And if those persons were as visible as Blacks were during the hundreds of years of slavery in this country, we would already have had a second Civil War.

Of all the most serious and divisive problems facing this country at this time, the most corrosive one, and the one most responsible for the seeming intractability of those problems is societal division over Abortion. Because it is the one most likely to engender contempt and even hatred between and among citizens on both sides of that issue - and of many other issues by extension.

That need not be. What is needed, besides a new realization of the primacy of Natural Law and a return to prayer, is elimination of the illegal involvement of the Federal government in the question via Roe v Wade and its progeny, and a return of the question to the States in this Republic. Barring that action, this country has entered a permanent period of Decline and Fall. It need not be.

GS

==================================================
ZENIT, The world seen from Rome
News Agency
==================================================

Expendable Babies
Human Life as a Consumer Product

By Father John Flynn, LC

ROME, DEC. 19, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Abortion advocates have long argued for a woman's right to control her body and to be able to dispose of the unborn child if she wishes. In a bizarre decision, a Belgian court has extended that reasoning to say that a child has a right to be aborted.

A Belgian journal, "Revue Générale des Assurances et Responsabilités," has just published the decision handed down by the Brussels Court of Appeal on Sept. 21 regarding the case of a child born disabled after an erroneous prenatal diagnosis, according to the Gènéthique press review for Nov. 29-Dec. 3.

The court ruled that the child's parents could claim damages from the doctors who failed to detect the disability. They said that by making therapeutic abortion legal, the legislators intended to allow women to avoid giving birth to seriously handicapped children, "having regard not only to the interests of the mother, but also to those of the unborn child itself."

Thus, the judges considered that the child would have had the "right" to an abortion if his disability had been correctly diagnosed.

The report on the decision did not explain how the court could consider an unborn child to be able to be the subject of rights, and why that right was only one to be killed and not to live.

Good mother?

The increasingly common acceptance of the view that it is better to abort handicapped babies was taken a step further by British writer Virginia Ironside when she declared that she would be prepared to suffocate a child to end its suffering, the Daily Mail newspaper reported Oct. 5.

Her comments came during a BBC1 radio program "Sunday Morning Live." Ironside also said that aborting an unwanted or disabled baby, "is the act of a loving mother."

Her statements provoked widespread criticism. Peter Evans, speaking on behalf of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said: "For us to make judgments that people are not worth life, not worth the opportunity to live, is a very dangerous thing," the Daily Mail reported.

An accompanying article authored by Ian Birrell, the father of a disabled 16-year-old daughter, acknowledged the difficulties of caring for a handicapped child but also said that it was an intensely rewarding experience. He accused Ironside of revealing a mind-set all too common, namely that people with disabilities are inferior to others.

"Imagine the outcry if Ms Ironside had said black children or gay teenagers should be exterminated," Birrell commented.

Others, however, defended her. Guardian newspaper columnist Zoe Williams argued that she had a "valid point and was brave to make it," in an Oct. 5 article.

Williams declared that Ironside's argument was a crucial move because she had asserted the moral dimension of being pro-choice. This was a blow to what Williams describes as "the self-proclaimed moral superiority of the anti-abortionists."

The Sunday Times gave Virginia Ironside a chance to further explain her reasoning in an opinion piece published Oct. 10. She argued that mercy killings of elderly and sick people do occur and that judges usually take a lenient view of this. Extending this practice to the unborn or newly born is simply what a good mother would do, she said.

New test

The attitude of eliminating those considered unfit will be aided by new tests that make it easier to detect abnormalities. A blood test for pregnant women capable of detecting almost all genetic disorders has been developed, London's Time newspaper reported Dec. 9.

If more extensive trials confirm the preliminary results, the test could eventually replace more invasive and riskier techniques such as amniocentesis, that involves inserting a needle in the womb to take a sample of fetal tissue.

As well, the test can be used as early as the eighth week of pregnancy, well before procedures currently used, giving women longer to decide whether to have an abortion, the Times added.

Alasdair Palmer, commenting on the news in the Dec. 11 edition of the London-based Telegraph newspaper, said that tests such as this could have prevented people like him being born. Palmer, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, raised the concern of a possible increase in abortions of babies with genetic defects, including minor ones such as a cleft palate.

Down Syndrome babies are routinely aborted, he noted, and once you accept the mentality of this being an acceptable practice, it becomes difficult to draw a line. Should we abort those suffering from dyslexia, autism, or being exceptionally short, he asked.

"I cannot see any basis that would enable the law to specify, never mind enforce, a principle which says: this genetic defect is bad enough to mean that it would be better if the foetus was never born -- but this one isn't," Palmer reflected.

Even without the new test there has been a significant decline in the birth of children with genetic disorders, due to selective abortion. A lengthy report by the Associated Press, published Feb. 17, quoted Dr. Wendy Chung, clinical genetics chief at Columbia University, as saying that due to screening there are decreased rates of disorders such as Tay-sachs.

In recent years, testing for cystic fibrosis has increased, and in Massachusetts, for example, births of babies with the condition dropped from 29 in 2000 to only 10 in 2003.

In California, the Associated Press reported, Kaiser Permanente, a large health organization, offered prenatal screening. From 2006 to 2008, 87 couples with cystic fibrosis mutations agreed to have fetuses tested, and 23 were found to have the disease. Sixteen of the 17 fetuses projected to have the severest type of disease were aborted, as were four of the six fetuses projected to have less severe disease.

Sometimes couples opt for abortion even when there is no genetic problem, as the Canadian National Post newspaper reported Dec. 10.

When the wife of an un-named couple in Toronto was found to be expecting twins, they felt they could not cope with an extra two children in addition to the young child they already had. So they decided upon what is termed "selective reduction," and one of the twins was aborted.

The article quoted a New York obstetrician, Mark Evans, who is a specialist in this technique, and he said that many cases involve a couple on their second marriage who already have children and want just one more additional child.

Unique

"God loves each human being uniquely and profoundly," Benedict XVI declared in Feb. 13 speech to members of the Pontifical Academy For Life.

The Pope observed that bioethics is a crucial battleground in the struggle between the supremacy of technology and human moral responsibility. In this conflict it is vital to maintain the principle of human dignity as a source for the rights of persons.

"When respect for the dignity of the person is invoked, it is fundamental that it should be full, total and without restrictions other than those entailed in the recognition that it is always human life that is involved," he affirmed.

The Pontiff warned that history shows how dangerous the state can be when it claims to be the source and principle of ethics and legislates on matters affecting the person and society.

The slide from a right to abortion to the right to be aborted amply demonstrates the perils of abandoning fundamental ethical principles.

Billy Graham's Prayer [reportedly] For Our Nation
'Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good,' but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values.. We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare. We have killed our unborn and called it choice. We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem. We have abused power and called it politics. We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment. Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and Set us free. Amen!'

==================================================
ZENIT, The world seen from Rome
News Agency
==================================================

Archbishop Chaput Revisits Notre Dame Controversy
Says Cardinal Cottier May Have Underestimated Gravity

ROME, OCT. 7, 2009 (Zenit.org).- An article written by a top Vatican theologian may have missed the mark and underestimated the "gravity" of the decision made by the University of Notre Dame last spring to invite President Barack Obama to speak at commencement, says the archbishop of Denver.

Archbishop Charles Chaput said this in an article appearing Tuesday in the Italian daily Il Foglio.

The article, published in full by the Catholic News Agency, directly addressed an essay written by Cardinal Georges Cottier, a retired theologian of the Pontifical Household, and published in July by the Catholic magazine 30 Days.

Cardinal Cottier's article downplayed the disagreement voiced publicly by more than 80 bishops and 300,000 laypeople in the weeks leading up to the president's scheduled address, and praised Obama for what he termed his "humble realism."

"Regrettably and unintentionally, Cardinal Cottier's articulate essay undervalues the gravity of what happened at Notre Dame," Archbishop Chaput affirmed. "It also overvalues the consonance of President Obama's thinking with Catholic teaching."

The archbishop, noting that he speaks for himself, and not for all U.S. bishops, acknowledged that Cardinal Cottier's essay "made a valuable contribution to Catholic discussion of the new American president."

"Our faith connects us across borders," he added. "What happens in one nation may have an impact on many others. World opinion about America's leaders is not only appropriate; it should be welcomed."

Point of departure

The archbishop explained that the outcry against Obama's appearance at Notre Dame had less to do with a personal attack than a very real and fundamental disagreement with the president's "views on vital bioethical issues, including but not limited to abortion, differ sharply from Catholic teaching."

"Much is made, in some religious circles, of the President's sympathy for Catholic social teaching," the prelate explained. "But defense of the unborn child is a demand of social justice. There is no 'social justice' if the youngest and weakest among us can be legally killed. Good programs for the poor are vital, but they can never excuse this fundamental violation of human rights."

Archbishop Chaput also explained that the timing and nature of the invitation caused the conflict: "At a time when the American bishops as a body had already voiced strong concern about the new administration's abortion policies, Notre Dame not only made the president the centerpiece of its graduation events, but also granted him an honorary doctorate of laws -- this, despite his deeply troubling views on abortion law and related social issues."

But the "real source of Catholic frustration," said Archbishop Chaput, was that Notre Dame "ignored and violated the guidance of America's bishops" in a 2004 document that "urged Catholic institutions to refrain from honoring public officials who disagreed with Church teaching on grave matters."

"Thus, the fierce debate in American Catholic circles this spring over the Notre Dame honor for Mr. Obama was not finally about partisan politics," he explained. "It was about serious issues of Catholic belief, identity and witness -- triggered by Mr. Obama's views -- which Cardinal Cottier, writing from outside the American context, may have misunderstood."

Common connection

Archbishop Chaput also commented on the connection Cardinal Cottier made in his article between "President Obama's frequently stated search for political 'common ground' and the Catholic emphasis on pursing the 'common good.'"

"These goals -- seeking common ground and pursuing the common good -- can often coincide," the archbishop noted. "But they are not the same thing. They can sharply diverge in practice.

"So-called common ground abortion policies may actually attack the common good because they imply a false unity; they create a ledge of shared public agreement too narrow and too weak to sustain the weight of a real moral consensus. The common good is never served by tolerance for killing the weak -- beginning with the unborn."

Finally, the archbishop praised Cardinal Cottier for reminding "his readers of the mutual respect and cooperative spirit required by citizenship in a pluralist democracy."

"But pluralism is never an end in itself," Archbishop Chaput noted. "It is never an excuse for inaction.

"As President Obama himself acknowledged at Notre Dame, democracy depends for its health on people of conviction fighting hard in the public square for what they believe -- peacefully, legally but vigorously and without apologies."

See also the What's Wrong and Right with the Catholic Church section
in The Catholic Church page of the Involved Citizen.

Article 1, for Sunday, March 18, 2006 Abortion and Alternatives	Article 2, for Sunday, April 2, 2006 What Abortion Is Not	Article 3, for Sunday, April 9, 2006 Alternatives To Abortion: Abstinence
Article 4, for Sunday, April 23, 2006 Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research	Article 5, for Sunday, April 30, 2006 Abortion And Alternatives: The Good, The Bad And The Ugly	Article 6, for Sunday, May 7, 2006 Some Background For End Of Life Discussions
Article 7, for Sunday, May 14, 2006 “After The Fact”: Post-Abortion Assistance to Women And Men	Article 8, for Sunday, May 21, 2006 Food And Hydration	Article 9, for Sunday, June 4, 2006 End Of Life Issues…So, What Do We Do?
Article 10, for Sunday, June 11, 2006 Of This And That…Here And Abroad	Article 11, for Sunday, June 18, 2006 Alternatives To Abortion: Adoption	Article 12, for Sunday, June 25, 2006 Euthanasia – Physician Assisted Suicide
Article 13, for Sunday, July 2, 2006 The Good, The Bad And The Ugly…A Sequel	Article 14, for Sunday, July 9, 2006 Palliative Sedation	Article 15, for Sunday, July 16, 2006 A Review…And Questions About Grey Areas
Article 16, for Sunday, August 20, 2006 Stem Cells – The Focus Of Much Research and “Hype”	Article 17, for Sunday, August 27, 2006 The Good, The Bad And The Ugly	Article 18, for Sunday, September 3, 2006 Politics And Stem Cells
Article 19, for Sunday, October 1, 2006 Respect For Life	Article 20, for Sunday, October 29, 2006 Respect For Life Issues	Article 21, for Sunday, November 26, 2006 The Election, And The U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Conference
Article 22, for Sunday, December 31, 2006 The Past – And The Future	Article 23, for Sunday, January 28, 2007 Faith…And Religions	Article 24, for Sunday, February 25, 2007 A Brief Summary Of Jewish Medical Ethics: Rabbi Carl Astor
Article 25, for Sunday, March 25, 2007 Protestantism: Dr. Robert H. Bartlett	Article 26, for Sunday, May 20, 2007 Islam: Altaf Rasool, M.D.	Article 27, for Sunday, June 3, 2007 Islam: Mahmoud N. Mansour, Imam of New London Islamic Center
Article 28, for Sunday, June 24, 2007 Capital Punishment – The Death Penalty	Article 29, for Sunday, July 29, 2007 Clarification Of The Doctrine Of The Church Regarding Other Religions	Article 30, for Sunday, October 14, 2007 The Death Penalty: Politics, Economics and Morality
Article 31, for Sunday, November 25, 2007 Immigration: A Crisis All Immigrants And Citizens Share	Article 32, for Sunday, January 6, 2008 New Advances In Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research	Article 33, for Sunday, February 2, 2008 Sexual Orientation: Religion And Science
Article 34, for Sunday, March 9, 2008 Gay Marriage, or Civil Union, or What?	Article 35, for Sunday, May 25, 2008 Human Reproduction, Catholic Morality, and The “Plan B” Morass	Article 36, for Sunday, July 13, 2008 Catholics, Church, and Communication: "What we have here is a failure to communicate"
Article 37, for Sunday, August 31, 2008 Cross Not Optional, Says Benedict XVI - ZENIT News Agency	Article 38, for Sunday, September 7, 2008 History of Church Teaching on Abortion; US Bishops Issue Fact Sheet - ZENIT News Agency	Article 39, for Sunday, September 21, 2008 When Human Life Begins: Science, not politics or religion
Article 40, for Sunday, October 26, 2008