|Back to Back Issues Page|
Compromise with Evil begins the ultimate death spiral.
February 17, 2012
Vic Biorseth, Friday, February 17, 2012
Compromise is necessary of course, any time more than one person get together to interact with each other. We observe certain rules of etiquette and manners just to properly take turns and carry on a civil conversation. We listen to points of view, and make decisions, quite often involving compromise of some sort, multiple times in one conversation. This seemingly easy way of reaching agreement lulls us into the dangerous assumption that everything should be compromise-able.
The problem with this natural tendency is that a Vital Principle cannot be compromised; if it ever is, it ceases to be a vital principle. Some examples of Vital Principles might be:
The urge to peacefully compromise leads us to long for a leader who can “bring us all together” and lead us all, a leader somehow representing every faction and splinter group, with everyone willingly cooperating with this wonderful new leader.
So long as evil exists, it ain’t gonna happen, unless the leader is evil, and evil comes out on top of the “compromise,” or a long string of compromises.
When you compromise on any vital principle that vital principle is, in effect, set aside; it may as well be ignored, as if it no longer existed. Once compromised, a vital principle is extremely difficult to re-establish as a vital principle, which is supposed to be unshakable. Once successfully shaken, everybody knows it is no longer unshakable. Once compromised, everybody knows it is no longer uncompromised-able. It has been weakened; perhaps fatally so. Whenever evil is involved, one compromise always leads to another.
A grand example is the vital principle that says that “All Men are Created Equal.” It caused America’s first major compromise on a vital principle, and it was to have horrific consequences. With Jefferson in the lead, the Founding Fathers tried, but failed, to pass a resolution freeing all slaves at the time of the authoring of the Declaration of Independence, leaving a huge moral dichotomy in one of our establishing principles. How could we say that we were all equal while slavery still existed? The argument persisted and heated up all during the Revolutionary War, and came to a head at the Constitutional Congress, when trying to agree on the wording of our Constitution.
The abolitionists wanted to end slavery; the planters were equally adamant that slavery continue. The abolitionist argument tried to emphasize morality, and the planter argument tried to emphasized economics and the principle of private property. Compromise seemed impossible; yet, if not done, the new nation would break apart. The United States itself depended on a compromise of some sort.
The abolitionists saw in Article 1 Section 2 – describing the apportionment of representation in Congress based on population – the opportunity to get slave representation in Congress, because already in some rural areas of the South slaves might outnumber planters. They intended to count the slaves, for purposes of representation. Eventually, the slaves might “represent” themselves into freedom. Representatives are supposed to represent, in government and in legislation, all the people in their geographic area of representation. In hot debate, the planters refused saying that slaves were not to be considered human; obviously, a loosing argument at the outset, just on purely rational grounds. Slaves were clearly human.
As the abolitionists began to win the argument, the topic was turned to be representation of free citizens; but there were various indentured servants who were not considered to be free until their period of indenture expired, and all agreed that they should be represented even before they were free of indentured service. The planters insisted that slaves not be counted at all, but the abolitionists persisted, and began an embarrassing campaign of arguing and haggling what fraction of a slave might be considered by the planters to be an actual person. The compromise fraction was settled at three fifths of a slave, and so it was written in Article 1 Section 2.
Abolition was gaining ground in the reestablishment of a vital principle, because even when counted as three fifths of a person, the slave would have considerable representation in Congress rather than none. Representation was seen to be a path to eventual abolition of slavery. But, the planters planted their feet and dug in deeper, refusing to budge, and becoming more bellicose and belligerent in the process. All of this culminated, of course, in the Civil War. The moral principle involved – equality – could not be broken if America was to stand as founded.
So a political compromise on a vital moral principle ultimately resulted in a horrible civil war. Brother against brother; father against son; families torn asunder; a whole nation ravaged by war. Tens of thousands killed in single epic battles, battle after battle, seemingly without end. If only the vital principle had been seen and recognized by all, none of it need have happened.
What other nation, in all of world history, ever fought such a costly, destructive, horrible war with itself over a mere Moral Principle? In all of human history, what other people shed so much of their own blood, family ties, treasure and well-being for the freedom of slaves, for men who were not even citizens, who were not considered by many to be human, and who had no rights or protections before the existing law as free men?
Only America. America stood alone in putting Principle above even life itself. The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves, and the 14th Amendment made them full participating citizens. Unfortunately, it also made all civil war veterans who fought for the South into second-class citizens, with no representation, no vote and no voice. That was not the way Lincoln intended it to be, but he was assassinated, and that is how it came to be. We talked about some of these events in the Threats to our National Existence page and the Racial Victimology page.
Northern “Carpet Baggers” flooded to the South to make their fortunes at the expense of impoverished, non-voting and unrepresented Southerners, and a whole new version of terrorism and counter terrorism began, between veterans from both sides, and racism was inflamed, and the Klan was born.
Eventually all of that died away, but had a violent resurgence under Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who almost single-handedly revitalized the virtually dead Ku Klux Klan, re-segregated the government and the military, and got the racial pressure cooker going again.
And here we are. I’m not going to go over the old ground again regarding all the professional “Black Leaders” who made lucrative careers out of keeping black Americans angry, alienated and un-assimilated into the larger American culture. The whole point of this discussion on race is that all of this – all of it – began with a moral compromise on a vital principle. A vital principle is something we all should stand on. Moral men should all refuse to compromise on a vital principle. We are either a principled people, or an un-principled people. A man of principle, or a people of principle, will not back down and will not compromise on a vital principle.
As we said in the Catholic teaching on slavery page, with the arrival of the first Dutch slave ships in the Colonies, the stunned Colonists immediately acted to pass laws against the abomination of forced slavery, only to have their laws overturned by the Kind of England. America didn’t even exist yet, as a nation; in instances such as this, law was dictated to us from England. By the time of the Constitutional Convention, many planters had grown economically addicted to slavery, and so, there we were: forced to compromise on a vital moral principle in order to establish a new nation. Now, centuries later, we can wonder if we will ever heal as a people, and actually be a whole people, from the deep divisive wounds caused by such a moral compromise.
Every moral compromise makes Satan smile. Even the smallest ones. Especially the first compromise on any moral issue. Satan is a really good door-to-door salesman, and the first moral compromise is a foot in the door.
Today, the moral compromise du jour involves
The audacity is breathtaking.
He has no Constitutional authority to dictate any of this to anyone; but so long as the Senate is Marxist-Democrat, and so long as the Senate is the only place where cases of impeachment are tried, nobody is going to stop him. And now the Democrats and their propaganda arm, the SLIMC, are squealing the high-volume flagrant categorical lies regarding how Republican candidates intend to outlaw contraception. And how there exists, somewhere, such a thing as a women’s right to contraception, and even to free contraception.
There is no such right, and there never was. There is not even a “right” to health care at all, let alone any special women’s right to some part of it. This is not an equal rights issue. There is no “equal right” to health care, or to contraception, or to sterilization, or to abortion. They make this crap up out of thin air, and then scream it at the TV cameras. The voting people who make up the Democrat Party base are stupid enough to believe it.
Contraception has never been illegal, and no one anywhere intends to make it illegal.
Never in my lifetime, and probably never in world history, has contraception ever been illegal in civil law, or unavailable, or expensive. If that’s not correct, I’m sure someone will correct me soon enough. The Catholic Church has always taught, since long before America existed, that contraception, sterilization and abortion are intrinsically evil, disordered, unnatural and gravely sinful. And so did all – I repeat – all of Christianity, including every single Protestant denomination in existence, right up until 1930. Go to the Contraception page for the details of how it all unraveled, beginning with one little, itsy-bitsy, teensy-weensy moral compromise. Only Roman Catholicism and Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy kept to the original teaching.
That is, the Roman Catholic Church in Rome kept to the original teaching. Not so here in America. Some American Bishops and Cardinals openly challenged Paul VI’s Humana Vitae upon publication, other American Bishops and Cardinals were silent on the subject, and far too few were outspokenly supportive of it. Here we had a clear case involving princes of the Church compromising on a clear matter of vital moral importance.
Today, we reap the harvest of what they sowed. They have taught error in their particular Churches. Fatal error. They have created multiple generations of American Catholics who don’t see anything wrong with contraception. It has become a way of life, in Catholic families. It is now acceptable, and treated as a mere form of recreation. American Bishops have imbued their congregations with invincible ignorance, and, as John Paul the Great once said, they will burn in Hell for it.
”I related the story in current news about the New York Bishops ad limina visit to John Paul the Great in 1983. The visit involved two dining groups with John Paul, one for Breakfast and one for lunch, each with about 25 or so Bishops at table with the Pope. At lunch, during soup, the ordinary Bishop of Long Island was talking to John Paul, who seldom speaks at these events, telling him that there were so many American Catholics who suffered from “invincible ignorance” in matters of Divine Revelation that “invincible Ignorance” should help many of them get into Heaven.
We have in this country what others have referred to as a Catholic Counter Magisterium that has become an authority unto itself; it is a self-proclaimed elitist body within the Church, that somehow evades not only excommunication, but even recognition as a force that regularly compromises the Truth. Compromise is their name. They have led millions in error. They do not stand on principle; they are un-principled men. Like the Democrat Party and the SLIMC, they put more value in the ideas of Marx than in the ideas under-girding America’s founding and constitution documents. We come to them for light, and what we encounter is compromise that only increases darkness and diminishes light. Compromise, compromise, compromise.
If you don’t believe me, go to the Refuting Perverted Catholicism page to see my evidences. Pay particular attention to the Catholic Communizer Dorothy Day page for the incredible vision of the merging of revolutionary Communism with Catholicism, which you would think would be oil and water – not in the least compatible. But they are joined. That is what compromise can do.
Here’s the bottom line on contraception: through compromise, it has become as common in America as bread and butter. Prior to 1930, it was unthinkable in Western civilization. Again, see the Contraception page for the world history of it. Nevertheless, it has never been illegal, it has never been unavailable and it has always been cheap. No one is seeking to legally ban it. The statement that anyone, including any Republican candidate, would ban it is a typical Marxist-Democrat and Marxist-media political lie. Democrats are, after all, MEJTMLs. It’s their job. The goal of the Marxist lie is to make us compromise.
Contraception has nothing to do with health other than to harm it.
Sterilization has nothing to do with health other than to harm it.
Abortion has nothing to do with health other than to harm it.
There is nothing healthy about any of these things. All of them are unnatural; none of them can make anyone healthier. They have nothing to do with health care. They are not good for you.
There is no right to equal health care, any more than there is a right to equal food. Food, you will agree, is more immediately vital to health than medicine. Many people live to a ripe old age never seeing a doctor. But no one can go without food for very long without dieing of starvation. Why the sudden concentration on health care? If anything is deemed to be worthy of being established as a legal right it should be added to the Constitution through the amendment process. Until that is done there is no right to it, and government has no legal or legitimate authority to impose it or dictate it.
The argument will be presented that condoms prevent venereal diseases; it is a false argument on several levels. First, it assumes that sex causes venereal disease infection, which is false. Sex outside of marriage causes venereal disease infection. Men and women who never have sex before marriage, and who never commit adultery after marriage, never experience venereal disease infection. Ever. That’s the way it is.
The only people on earth who ever get venereal disease are fornicators, adulterers and sodomites. No exceptions.
Oral contraceptives have been very strongly linked to breast cancer.
Before the 1930 breaking of the moral dam on contraceptive usage there were only three venereal diseases. Since then, there are over 25, and half of them are incurable. Many, such as HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) are not prevented by condom usage. Any skin contact anywhere in the genital area transmits it. HPV is a leading cause of cervical cancer. One quarter of what is euphemistically called the “Sexually Active” population is already infected with it. Go figure.
If you think we are better off today with looser sexual morals you are wrong. See the Refuting Free Love page and the right-column links on that page for where all this compromise has carried us. Vast segments of society are now enslaved to the world, having freed themselves from demonized moral norms.
Democrats will never address the moral problems causing the spread of disease, the breakdown of the normative family and the moral decay in society because Democrats promote and actively participate in all of it. There is never, ever any sex scandal on the Democrat side of the aisle, because licentiousness and perversion are normal for them. Whenever a Republican is caught with his pants down the Democrats and their media suddenly rediscover Judao-Christian values on the subject and roundly publicly condemn the offender. Then they drop their pretended morality and quietly go back to their own atheistic and depraved lifestyles. It’s an important part of their job.
That’s what compromise led them to. That’s where compromise is leading us.
Compromise on high principle will be the death of America.
Most people today think that the so-called Moral Conservative political position is something separate and distinct from the so-called Fiscal Conservative political position. I submit the argument that, in America at least, they are inter-dependent, and cannot stand alone. All of the Founding Fathers said and wrote as much. They all emphasized fiscal frugality and conservatism; they also strongly stated that the new nation they were constituting absolutely depended upon a highly moral Christian population. It is Judao-Christian teaching and belief that makes us, as it made them, fiscally frugal and conservative in the first place. Our greatness as a nation, Tocqueville said, was the result of our Christian goodness as a people. The minute we cease being good, we begin the slide from greatness, toward the abyss of amorality, where the ends justify the means, and there is no other rule.
We see a clear barometer level of where we are as a culture in the current brouhaha over one of Santorum’s supporters and his public comment re the old time cheap and effective contraception pill that was an aspirin pill for the young woman to hold between her knees. Now, from the Left, where filthy jokes thrive, where pornography is protected speech, where promiscuity is the norm, we see that a joke about chastity is breathtakingly abhorrent. Santorum didn’t even say it; someone else did. But the universal response from the Marxist-Democrats and the Marxist-SLIMC is that it is creepy, and shocking, and absolutely unacceptable in polite society. Chastity for singles, or periodic abstinence for the married, is what is creepy, and shocking, and absolutely unacceptable in polite society. And Santorum needs to publicly answer for it.
Even Greta Van Susteren thinks the aspirin joke is “creepy.” Even Santorum himself thinks it was stupid and “off color.” So, now chastity is creepy, and off color. It is virtue, and not vice, that is now to be avoided in polite company. It seems that times have changed. Among the journalists and pundits, the shameless champions of abortion, pornography, free sex, homosexual marriage, public acceptability of open, in-your-face homosexuality, shacking-up, recreational sex, and on, and on, are publicly horrified over a joke line recommending chastity.
In my eyes, Santorum is still the most conservative man of principle in the race; but this little tempest in a teakettle provided a little window into the current state of culture rot in America. You can blame public education; you can blame the Democrats; you can blame corrupt politicians; you can blame Marx; all deserve some blame. Personally, I blame churchmen, including most especially Roman Catholic Bishops, for not holding the line during and after the 1930 initial compromise on contraception. Since then, it has been compromise after compromise after compromise.
And that isn’t the only area of culture rot going on. Both the Democrat Party and the so-called “Establishment” Republican Party are more deeply imbued with the grand ideas of Marxism than with the grand ideas the form America. We didn’t get to this point overnight; this has been brewing for at least a hundred years.
Once upon a time the very best method of preparing for a comfortable retirement was to have a lot of children. I’ll bet you didn’t know that. It didn’t matter how rich or how poor you were; lots of children were your very best investment; your children would take care of you in your old age. That was when the whole of society adhered to Honor thy father and thy mother from infancy on. America was steeped in it. Everyone was raised in it. The strongest support system any man could have was a large family; the larger the family, the stronger the support system for each member. Blood really was thicker than water.
The second strongest social support system was the Church; everybody belonged, everybody went, every Sunday. If the widow or the orphan was not taken in by some other family, they would be taken in by the Church.
That was then, this is now. Marxian ideas have attacked not only the ideas of private property and personal profit – they have successfully attacked the family, and they have successfully attacked the Church. What’s left, for you to invest in? Money. Save your money; that’s it. Compromise with the world and try to retire on money, because the family is gone, and the Church is gone, as far as being good support systems you can depend on. The Democrats want you to depend on the government.
Many clerics of all denominations including many Catholic Bishops have been compromised into blurring the distinction between Marxist redistributionism and charity. They see Marx’s recommended and America’s adopted graduated income tax as a form of charity, since so much of it goes to entitlements. They have forgotten that charity must be freely given to be charity, and that you may only give from your own holdings, not from anyone else’s holdings, for it to be charity. They no longer know the proper definition of the virtue they are supposed to teach.
Any time you hear any churchman using terminology such as Social Justice your antennae should go up and your anti-Marxian radar should switch on. Our Churches, too, have been corrupted.
How’s your family doing?
God help us.
Do not reply to this automatic email.
Respond to this article at the link below :
This article and comments may be found on the web site at the link below:
Visit Vic Biorseth on FaceBook at the link below:
|Back to Back Issues Page|