What People Are Commenting

donate Books CDs HOME updates search contact

Kids, Embryonic Cells & Dynastic Rights


Kids and Animals
WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg - 24011 Bytes
Greetings,

Thank you for your comment on the term children vs. kids. While I admit that I have not always been vigilant in my language, I too prefer the former term. Children need to be reminded that they are made in the image and likeness of Almighty God. Calling them kids is insulting and denigrates the dignity of children.

God elevated the dignity of mankind by becoming one of us. Calling children "kids" is a denial of that and smacks of Nazism in that the Nazis equalized the rights of animals and humans by passing laws to protect animals while not enforcing laws to protect humans.

Besides, no animal can go to Heaven. Children can and sometimes do.

     Regards,

     C.M.R.
burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


Large Families
WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg - 24011 Bytes
Good day TIA,

I wanted to say hello and look forward to making a donation or purchase in the near future.

I did read Dr. Horvat's article on feminine frozen eggs. I do believe that this culture is becoming dominant. I just read about a woman who already had children and then had multiple births.

Many more Roman Catholic families need to have large families. I believe I will be fighting on the battlefield in my senior years. Literally.

     Sincerely,

     C.J.F.
burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


Violating the Code of Ethics
WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg - 24011 Bytes
TIA,

In the matter of embryonic stem-cell research, it is a basic moral principle that one cannot benefit by the wrongdoing of others. Courts have long held that to allow government to benefit from a wrongful act provides an unhealthy incentive to persist in such acts.

You cannot distance yourself from previous immoral acts that have resulted in the killing of embryonic human beings.

The end does not justify the means. You do not kill people to save people.

Such a view of human embryos flouts ethical principles contained in the Nuremberg Code and in the National Institutes of Health's Guidelines for the Conduct of Research Involving Human Subjects. Both clearly express the fundamental principle governing human experimentation that "no experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur."

The common good, which is supposed to be the primary goal of the state, is not served when embryonic human beings are arrogantly denied a right to life by former embryos.

To consider this "good science" by ignoring the proven success record of non-embryonic stem-cell research is a bastardization of science.

A longstanding medical principle - 'do no harm' - has been breached.

We are no longer talking about a slippery slope. We have completely stumbled and are falling head first into a disastrous pit where the next expendable utility, as determined by the state, could very well be what is reflected in our mirrors.

     Gary L. Morella
burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


Stuart versus Windsor
WhatPeopleAreSaying02_Cir_sm.jpg - 24011 Bytes
Dear Sirs,

As a Catholic who is fairly new to the counter-revolutionary position, I wish to thank you. Your website has opened my eyes to the current crisis in the Church, and I have also been encouraged by many of your articles (particularly those that deal with the restoration of Christendom and the upcoming Reign of Mary).

As a newly-traditional Catholic who is a subject of the Canadian (British) throne, I am confused as to what the Catholic position is toward Elizabeth II and her family. I have heard it said in some Catholic circles that she is a usurper in the eyes of the Church; and many of those who claim this, believe that the throne rightfully belongs to HRH the Duke of Bavaria, since he is the heir of the House of Stuart.

I am a monarchist, and believe that kings are "God's Anointed"; so, this information has left me wondering, as a Catholic, to whom do I owe allegiance? What is the mind of the Church on this issue?

I hope you don't mind my asking this, but I cannot think of anyone else sympathetic to monarchy who might provide me with the traditional Catholic answer.

Thank-you, and God bless.

     In Christ and Our Lady,

     T.L., Canada

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


TIA responds:

Dear T.L.,

Thank you for your consideration and kind words about our website.

We are not specialists in dynastic genealogy and cannot help you regarding who would have the right of succession to the English throne if the reigning Windsor dynasty were proved to be illegitimate and invalid.

We also don't know if the right to succession of the Catholic House of Stuart continues to prevail against a Protestant dynasty in England that, by way of the facts, has been on the throne for more than 400 years. It is a difficult question to resolve that involves comparative studies of Natural Law, Catholic Morals, History and the commonly accepted International Law.

The only judge of whom we can think to arbitrate such a case would be a truly Catholic Pope. However, for a long time the policy of the Catholic Church in the United Kingdom has been to recognize de facto the reigning dynasty. Further, Popes John XXIII (once) and John Paul II (twice) received Elizabeth II at the Vatican acknowledging her as the legitimate Queen of England. Here it is no longer only a question of de facto recognition, but the protocol exercised at those visits was that used for a reigning sovereign. One sees, therefore, that the Vatican went a step further and acknowledged a de jure status to her kingdom.

A photograph of the Vatican receiving Sovereign Elizabeth II

In 1961 the Vatican used the formal protocol due a reigning Sovereign to receive Elizabeth II
Thus, to the first difficult question regarding the right of the House of Stuart, a second was added, the de facto acceptance of the House of Windsor by the Catholic Church in the U.K., and a third, its de jure acceptance by the conciliar Popes.

It seems to us that anyone who wants to claim the right of the House of Stuart to the throne of England should have good arguments to prove that the present day situation is not legitimate and valid.

Unfortunately we have neither the solution for these questions nor the needed time for such serious studies. We just pray for the conversion of England, including its Monarch.

We hope these general considerations will be of some assistance to you.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk
Posted April 28, 2009

burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


The opinions expressed in this section - What People Are Commenting -
do not necessarily express those of TIA


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


Related Topics of Interest


catholic  Please Say Children, Not Kids

catholic  Nine Frozen Little Ones Hanging Out

catholic  Right to Life - Visit Our Page

catholic  Clans and Human Types

catholic  Vocations of the European Peoples

catholic  Organic Formation of Feudalism

catholic  Coronation of the Emperor


burbtn.gif - 43 Bytes


Button_Donate.gif - 6240 Bytes



Comments  |  Questions  |  Objections  |  Home  |  Books  |  CDs  |  Search  |  Contact Us  |  Donate

Tradition in Action
© 2002-   Tradition in Action, Inc.    All Rights Reserved