Anderson Cooper reminds us of the power of liberalism

The power of liberalism is to assume liberalism and truth are one and the same.  To not embrace a liberal mindset is to, by default, be either stupid, evil, or both.  And of course wrong.  So Anderson Cooper, based completely on a single, liberal and secularized understanding of, well, everything, takes apart Mike Huckabee over Huckabee's opposition to gay marriage and the imprisonment of Kim Davis over her Christian beliefs running afoul of of the non-Christian based laws that Cooper advocates.

As I tell my boys, the difference between conservatives and liberals is simple.  Conservatives believe they are right and everyone else is wrong.  Liberals know they are right and everyone else is either stupid or evil.

Watch and enjoy.  Again, someday it will be illegal to be Christian unless your Christaintiy, like everything else, is brought down to kneel before the gospel of liberalism.  This is only a a warning shot.

No fault annulments

So Pope Francis has streamlined the whole annulment process.  Now I'm no expert in that department.  Few Catholic I know are.  Long and short, the annulment process in the Church is supposed to flush out those rare instances where a marriage was never valid in the first place.  The reasons differed, but generally they should have been grave - it was never consummated, or one of the parties was coerced, or important information was withheld, or similar extreme cases.  

In practice, unfortunately, the process seems to have become a long, cumbersome dodge around the modern no-fault divorce world in which we live.  People married for years who had kids and grandkids were told their marriages were null.  Just what constitutes an invalid marriage if you can be married for years with kids and grandkids?  Isn't that just divorce with a different name?

At least it was such a long, burdensome process that nobody looked forward to it, many chose to dodge it, and at least there was this idea that having gotten a divorce, you weren't where the Church wanted you to be. 

But now Pope Francis has, in the name of mercy, made the process easier.  Naturally, for a significant portion of the Catholic apologetics world, there is no problem.  There never is.  Pope Francis is never wrong.  All is right with the world. In this corner is Jimmy Akin, who does a great job giving some background on what annulments are at least supposed to be, and a very direct take on how Pope Francis will work it out.

There are others, however, who aren't too thrilled with Pope Francis on a variety of topics.  In this corner is Michael Dougherty.  I don't know if he's been critical of Pope Francis in other areas, but he certainly sees a major problem with this.  The biggest problem seems to be that Pope Francis might be making it so impossible for people in the modern world to have an idea of what a real Catholic marriage is, a huge swath of their marriages might well be null anyway.  Sort of no-fault annulments.  You just say you're a victim of modern dumb, and it was never a marriage anyway.  Try again.  Kids and other considerations?  I don't know. 

So there you have it.  Two takes.  Once again either Pope Francis is really awesome and any mix ups or misunderstandings are the result of vast anti-Pope conspiracies or the result of dumb people who are dumb.  Or he is a child of the modern age, with heavy sympathies to the point of views progressive ideals and morals.  Time will tell. 

The face of homosexual tolerance

Yep, expect more of it. We've already learned that, in the name of Gay Tolerance (or Welcoming and Affirming), small business owners will be crushed with heavy fines meant to destroy their livelihoods unless they conform.  Now it's to the prisons, much to the delight of gay onlookers.  I say the last part because in the news clips of her standing her ground against the plaintiffs (that is, the two homosexuals wanting to get "married"),  one of the gentlemen  proudly proclaimed that she should be "taken away in handcuffs!"  Again, in the name of tolerance and diversity.

I know.  She is a government employee.  It's part of the job for better or worse.  Maybe it could have been handled differently.  Maybe the governor could have stepped in and found a compromise.  I also know that Ms. Davis is a flawed human being with failings in her own past.  Or so the media told me in the effort to discredit her.  After all, the leftist definition of hypocrisy is anyone taking a non-liberal stand that has failed.  Better to have no morals and avoid the charge of hypocrisy.

Which shows why those who once proclaimed a brotherhood of man persons where all will live in harmony and tolerance and diversity and respect for differing opinions can now use the power of the government to smash any who fail to grovel before the might of their dogmatic moral proclamations.
No doubt there will be Christians who will line up and spew contempt on Ms. Davis, saying she's doing it all wrong, she is a bad witness, she isn't handling this in the proper, Christian way.  But please.  Can someone tell me if there is anyone left so stupid as to think there is any hope in compromising with this new secular modernity juggernaut?  Does anyone now think, when viewing the above picture, that the post-Christian Left is the slightest bit interested in "live and let live"?  Or compromising if Christians will just meet them halfway? Tell me there is no example of such irredeemable idiocy still left in the world.

BTW, FWIW, I think this is not looking as good as many in the media would like.  I've heard several media outlets pulling their collars and suggesting that maybe there could have been some compromise.  I didn't really hear that with the bakers.  Why?  My guess - and my guess only - is that there is still hope that common sense and values are not dead in America.  And seeing a picture of a couple of bakers with things and stuff and things doesn't really resonate.  But seeing a woman thrown in jail, in a mugshot, all because of her Christian beliefs, may just rouse that sleeping giant.  They could be wrong.  But just in case, I think this is an image the press would rather avoid.