Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Child in Utero not a mere piece of Tissue

This mioght require an outside view. In my test it loaded in Windows Media Player

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Church 'in need of women priests'

The Church of England would struggle in the future without women priests, researchers claim.

English Church Census figures show that half of priests ordained in recent years were women. There were 1,262 serving women priests in 2002.

University of Manchester researchers say that, without women priests, pulpits would become "depopulated". Is that necessarily a bad thing if the church might be teaching wrongly

The findings follow the Archbishop of Canterbury's suggestion that they had failed to transform the church. On the contrary I believe that the whole issue of women as prelates in the church have led many to expect homosexuals, by its very nature many woman who are motivated to become part of the establishment are coming with an agenda to change the situation and are also likely to be on the liberal side. Without the woman the CofE would be decidedly evangelical in nature!

Rowan Williams, in an interview with the Catholic Herald newspaper earlier this month, said he did not think women priests - first ordained in 1994 - had "transformed or renewed the Church in spectacular ways" nor had they "corrupted or ruined it". They corrupted or ruined it, NO but they and Mr Williams himself have given it a good try, but this is nothing that the King of Kings did not allow from the beginning of time.

Census findings

The University of Manchester's David Voas said: "Close to a quarter of male parish priests are 60 or older and their average age is 54.

"Without women, the pulpits would become as depopulated as the pews in the years to come." That will be fine, a church is not a building it is anywhere where Gods people meet. In fact the depopulation might be a good thing. The British church is in a great condition now, by and large where older generations thought they were followers of Christ because they were baptized and went to the church maybe on easter now, no one is under that delusion.

It was not surprising women clergy seemed not to have made an impact because the Church was "far from being an equal opportunity employer", he added. The "True" church is not one of hierarchy, glory and appearance, it is one of service. The Archbishop is supposed to be the chief servant, though one could not tell that.

"Women are not yet allowed to become bishops and they are far more likely to be 'second class' clergy. again this is not about class nd recognition from man but from God.

"Most of the men who became priests in 2005 went into paid 'stipendiary' ministry, while most of the women are in voluntary posts."

Other denominations were also more likely to favour male ministers over their female counterparts, he said.

The census found there were no women at all in churches which had congregations of 330 or more on a typical Sunday. Could it be that these were all Evangelical?

"Well over half of women ministers in all denominations serve in rural areas with very few found in the flagship city centre churches," Mr Voas said.

"The larger the church, the more likely it is that a man will be put in charge."


I find this an interesting time for the Anglican communion, it would appear that they did not have any problem with women leading a church, contrary to the bible.


Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Is it the parents or the states responsiblity for the child



Babies born at or before 22 weeks should not be resuscitated or given intensive care, a report says....However, research shows that many of these babies do not live very long, or go on to develop severe disability.
Earlier this month the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said it wanted a discussion over whether "deliberate intervention" to cause death in severely disabled babies should be legalised.
But the report recommends the active ending of the life of newborn babies should not be allowed, no matter how serious their condition.


So the question Really about whois responsible for the child. In the 19th century there were private orphanage's to take care of the children that were not being taken care of by the parents and this was not viewed as the states role. In the 20th century he state took on this role and now we have the state as guardian of the child, this is OK accept now its saying that the state decides first and the parents are tertiary to the parents decisions. The state will always take into its decision economy and needs of the state and relegate the life of the person to a low priority. This is why they say

However, research shows that many of these babies do not live very
long, or go on to develop severe disability.

A rational person would say 1. isn't life worth it and who is to judge if one is worth living or not, if we are reduced to that that puts us in the same boat with the Nazi's who decided that millions of lives were not worth living 2. Some will grow to be perfectly "normal" is that not worth it.
With the advancement of technology comes a great responsabilty. It is far to easy to value one life over another when looking at a balance sheet, but children are not numbers

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

"life In prision" or "Jailed for Life"- Word Change


Showjumper killer given life term


What is the value of a Life?
Life in Prison now means 32 give or take many!!
I present before you two individuals who have proven to society that they have no right to live within it. now I make no comment on capital punishment. Rather I want to write about there right to ever be out of the prison walls, and if they escape there right to breath. These men/animals have proven to society that they have no right to live in it.
"Goldstraw had killed before when he beat his former lover Deborah Wheatley with a mallet in 2001 after she refused to leave her husband for him." He committed an atrocious murder was sentenced to a mere 7 years
and had been released early.
The dictionary says LIFE means
Its all convientent to talk about being kind, but the only ones who recieved life were the vicitims and their families.
"Miss Moore was beaten by a gang wielding baseball bats and robbed in an
attack in June 2003 planned by Dyche"
The moore murder was clearly preventable yet no one did anything to prevent it
as is the case with child molestation, society and the police are both overworked and uninterested. It is easier to brush it off as unimportant, until it comes out in the open and then everyone back peddals. The only way that this is going to change is for people to address the social issues of why a crime is allowed to contintue. Criminals need to know that when they commit a crime they are going to get caught, go to jail(forever for murder/child abuse) and its not going to be hard labour.
Miss Moore's Mother has the old understanding of life as she said
Miss Moore's mother Stella said she believed Dyche should not leave prison until he was dead.