Thursday, June 22, 2023

Sam Rocha wins!

The award for most asinine defense of the anti-Catholic sex show celebrated by the Dodgers:


That's hilarious.  I think it deserves the prize because I can always use a good laugh. 

I love the reaction from Smac.  Exactly what does that mean?  Who is talking about prayers for the reparation of costumes?  The answer is, of course, nobody.  That isn't what is happening among those who take the Gospel seriously.  

It means Sam, like those beholden to the Left, knows his place.  The Left is a jealous god, and will not tolerate dissent.  Whatever the Left does, whoever or whatever it slaughters, oppresses, mocks, or blasphemes, nobody on the Left  can speak against it. 

So Sam does the safe thing. He makes it about  - the reparation of costumes?   Which has nothing to do with what people are praying about or upset about.  Sam just put the word 'reparations' in to deflect back to another issue.  He's not defending the sex show.  He's not attacking it. He is simply deflecting.  He could have added Ronco Vegematic to the public prayers instead of reparations and it wouldn't have made less sense.  

It's funny.  I've seen those from my old Protestant stomping grounds, and friends I have who are not Catholic, express outrage at this.  Also, it's not some 'poor white Americans' whining either, see here.  For that matter, even non-Christians are offended by this naked anti-Catholic bigotry.  Meanwhile so many leftwing Catholics like Sam stumble over themselves to avoid calling out the same anti-Catholic blasphemy. Speaks volumes I'd say.  By their fruits you will know them, as the old saying goes. 

As a fun note, Sam's attempt at deflection was so disconnected from the actual topic, it immediately brought this to mind:

16 comments:

  1. Professors are not typically people with much integrity in our time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My son noticed in college that many of the students had little regard for their professors unless those professors told them what they wanted to hear. Even as late as when I was in college, we still had this feeling that our professors were at least the ones to speak with authority, no matter if we agreed or not. But back then professors still tried to act 'a step apart' from your average Cliff on a barstool. Though it was beginning to change, as I recall some of my younger professors from the day.

      Delete
    2. What did they want to hear? On what subject?

      Delete
    3. I think subjects are pretty broad now. My sons mostly avoided the frivolous classes, but my oldest had to end up taking a couple. In those classes, it's mostly activism with assignments. In those cases, the students appear to want affirmed in their respective activism. Depending on the class in question. If they took a women's studies class, then it's feminism, abortion rights, things like that. The professors are expected to support one side of the issue or they pay the price. Naturally, in most cases, there is no problem there.

      Delete
  2. And yet another platformed Catholic I had no idea existed. It doesn’t appear he has much interaction though. As a JPII Catholic the subsequent generation has been sorely disappointing in my original hopes for the renewal of the faith and the Church. But the internet and social media lobbed a societal bomb no one could foresee. Now everyone has a platform, an ego, and a brand to cultivate, and some seem not to care as much about the more important things in life - including an actual relationship with the God incarnate. I do not perceive “prayer infused life” diffusing from these types of posts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't be too hard on platformed Catholics. I have a blog after all. But I admit the problems you correctly refer to are ones I try to keep in mind myself. Sometimes I wish I had a hobby, then I'd make the blog about that. As it is, I'm fine with people having their platforms. It's what they do with it. This wasn't Sam almost a decade ago when I went over to Patheos. He has become more like this the deeper into alignment with the Left he's gotten. But then, as I said, he's smart enough to know that the left tolerates no dissent. That's why he and so many Catholics on the Left have done nothing about such an obvious attack against the Church and the Faith.

      Delete
    2. Hey you know if you made a gaming blog you'd have at least one reader! ;)

      Delete
    3. Nate, for your reading pleasure, check today's post. :)

      Delete
    4. Dave, I guess when I mean "platformed Catholics" I really mean those trying to make themselves relevant or branded in order to ultimately make money off of their professed faith/social media status. I have a social media presence myself, so technically I have a platform, but it is anathema to me to use our faith in a way that essentially pimps it for some ultimate worldly gain or recognition. I know that comes off as harsh, but over the years I've seen the people who care about their souls and have a conscience step back and continue an online presence in a more conversational way. (As you have.) Those attached to some worldly gain or recognition...even if it's just financial pittance writing for Catholic publications, have largely succumbed to a miserable state in order to maintain it, IMO. I realize this is a generalization, but I've seen enough over the years to feel fairly confident in making this general assessment. It saddens me of course, but it's also the reason I mostly stay away from the online Catholic chatter and try to live my life in the reality I find myself in.

      Delete
    5. I have always tried to keep it more informal and conversational. That's why I'm slow to ban. Most who comment, with only rare exception, typically keep it on good conversational manners as well. But I see your point. Especially when the Catholics in question attempt to use their positions or titles to suggest somehow that they are the ones to listen to because - credentials! It would be better for Sam to learn how to engage than write as if his credentials are what give him a pass where actual discourse is concerned.

      Delete
  3. Note that Rocha intentionally chose to say "costumes" instead of "blasphemy."

    Rocha isn't worth interacting with, but if you were to argue with him that would be the point to hit him with. Does he oppose blasphemy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He seems to have gotten worse over the years. I see him now and he comes off more as a troll than anything. It's as if he debates purely by trying to avoid the point as often as possible.

      Delete
    2. Rocha would steadfastly refuse to give you a straight answer on whether the "Sisters" mockery of Good Friday, et al, is blasphemous.

      He would never define blasphemy in anything resembling accepted theological terms, would engage in tu quoque games and ask deflecting questions in bad faith.

      The man's a fraud, and he has his reward.

      Delete
  4. Let's be fair. If this was a group called the Imams of Perpetual Explosions or the Rabbis of Truncated Manlies, and the respective offended groups showed up to protest, he'd surely be the first to denounce them for clamoring over costumes instead of for reparations for slavery or indigenous dispossession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please. Get real. Do you really thing this group would bravely charge forth and mock Islam? That reminds me of when the NYT ran photos of art mocking and blaspheming Christianity in order to display religiously offensive art after the Charlie Hebdo kerfuffle. No way the NYT would actually produce art offensive to Muslims, even if it was actually reporting the story. First, the Left is against Christianity and seeks to destroy it and all its teachings. Hence LGBTQ activists marching in solidarity with Islam (no gay marriage, laws against homosexuality) against America (legal gay marriage, LGBTQ as protected class). Like those thousands of black Americans killed by black Americans - it doesn't matter, as long as you're against America/the West. Second, much modern heroism is based on singling out little old blue haired ladies, and cowering in the corner against actual threats.

      Delete
    2. David- I agree. I forgot to add the /sarc tag. My apologies.

      Delete

Let me know your thoughts