Three Links Wednesday (vol. XVIII)

"There are two kinds of people in this world: those who believe in dogma and know it, and those who believe dogma and don’t know it."
G.K. Chesterton

--I--

Nearly 40 years ago, when there was a push to lobby the federal courts to strip away religious (and conscience) freedom from doctors and nurses etc concerning their right to refuse participation in the evil act of abortion, the US senate stepped up and passed legislation--by a landslide 92-1 vote--which would prevent this from happening. Now, a similar bit of legislation (the Blunt amendment) goes down to defeat in the senate: religious liberties--actual rights, actual freedom--is rejected by the majority vote in the senate in favor of a tyrannical fiat by the president, all in the name of--what, exactly? Quashing the opposition? It is meaningless to speak of such euphemism as "freedom of choice" when much more important freedoms are jeopardized, and less than meaningless to do so when those freedom are jeopardized without even managing to make any of those choices more accessible or affordable than they already are.

--II--

Speaking of standing for religious liberty, The American Catholic has a post about a teenage girl who is standing for hers in the face of opposition from a the American Legion Auxiliary. Note that they are not preventing her from practicing her faith in general, but only during the time she would be a delegate to their convention. Nevertheless, she is being faced with the choice between the prestige and honor of attending this program for which she was selected, and practicing her faith. Ironically enough, this organization describes itself as a "nonpartisan program that teaches young women responsible citizenship and love for God and Country."

--III--

Fellow IGNITUM TODAY contributor and former member of my parish Mr Devin Rose has a guest post with the Catholic Sistas in which he takes on the false dichotomy between "religion and relationship" in one of its myriad forms: "dogma vs spirituality."

--Bonus--

Study confirms something which most of us have figured out from simple observation: emotion plays a role in "rational" decision-making. This may be because as human beings we are not just computers or robots who look at the life, the universe, and everything through purely rationalistic eyes. I am not here commenting as to whether or not the emotions (or passions) should have a role in our decision-making, but only noting that it is evident that they do have such a role. This is why (among other things) just winning a debate (or an argument) does not generally suffice to bring the losers over to the winners' side (that is, point of view). Tip of the derby cap to Mrs Jennifer Fulwiler.