A Pinch Of Incense

It has been interesting to read the various reactions to the recent declaration (decision seems too mild of a descriptor). Many have realized that this was never about legitimacy, or equality.

It was about absolution.

Those who act against the natural law cannot help but recognize, somewhere deep down inside, that their actions are disordered. As St. Paul explained in his letter to the Romans, the law is written on our hearts. They know, whether or not they will admit it to themselves (they certainly wouldn’t admit it to others), that they do wrong. Naturally enough this leads to guilt. As a general rule, we human beings don’t like guilt. Not in the slightest. And so we seek a way to remove it, however we can.

One particularly easy (although not ultimately successful) method  to deal with guilt is to have others approve the actions which lead to it. After all, if others say that we are in the right, how can we possibly be in the wrong? Of course, this won’t last. And the reason why this is only just the beginning.

They won’t stop here. Legitimacy can still be threatened by those who express disagreement. That is still possible- for the moment. Disagreement and dissent will be intolerable to them. After all, their goal is to have everyone affirm what they are doing. Conflicting viewpoints break up this harmony and threaten the comfort they are trying to build for themselves. What they want is to be told that they are right; what they fear is to be told that they are wrong.

What we see now is only the first step in a larger plan. It has three “phases,” if you will.

Phase 1 is to legitimize their actions in general society. This has been effectively accomplished.

Phase 2 will be to silence any who dissent, any who break from the “party line.” This is being worked towards even as you read this.

Phase 3 will involve forcing everyone to affirmatively voice their support for “the new normal.” We, all of us, will be required to say that nothing is wrong about what they do. That their actions and lifestyle are just as valid as any other. In short, we will be required to offer a pinch of incense before the idols of this present age.

Understand that silence is not enough for them. The Romans once said “Qui tacet consentit.” It can be translated as silence gives consent. That isn’t enough. You see, they will know that if you don’t speak up and voice your support, it means you disagree. That you dissent. [That massive display of support recently was based on this awareness- those who participated wanted to make it clear that they don’t dissent.]  Knowing that someone dissents will be enough to discomfort them, and that just won’t do. After all, much of the reason for what is going on is so they can be comfortable. Anything that can negatively affect that comfort will be seen as a threat. And threats must be crushed.

So they will require everyone to speak up and affirm them. No one will be exempt from this. The choice presented to us will be simple: say that we support them, their views and their choices, or else.

What is that else?

The priest at church this Sunday was particularly blunt. He warned us that persecution was coming. Few words were spared about it; little needed to be said because it was obvious to most, if not all, of us there.

It will start subtle at first, and build over time. I don’t think it will be prison, at least not in the beginning. My suspicion is that they will go for our soft spots, the places where we are truly vulnerable: our livelihoods to start off, I think. They will threaten us with losing our employment, our means of support. Going after our finances will be easy and relatively bloodless. Only those who are self-employed will be safe… at first. In the long run I fully expect them to find ways to go after even those who are their own boss. Discrimination laws, boycotts, and all manner of coercive acts in between will all find a use.

After that I expect that they will go after parents with children. It will only get worse from there.

Do not expect things to suddenly get better. Do not expect “the silent majority” to grow a spine and suddenly strike back against those who are “going overboard.” They lack the will and attention span to do anything more than delay what is coming. Nor should you expect the law or the Constitution to provide any defense. In the end those words on paper will mean whatever they want them to mean.

Let’s not lie to ourselves. They are going to do their damnedest to push us out of civil society.  We need to prepare ourselves. We need to organize. We need to form new communities, built to withstand the coming storm. It is unclear how much time we have. I figure that we have, at most, a generation or so before Phase 3 arrives in full force. So it behooves us to start immediately. Failure on our part will mean that we are pushed back to the catacombs. It may come to that anyways. But if we act now we have a chance of preserving that which matters.

Advertisements

32 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Churchianity, God, The Church

32 responses to “A Pinch Of Incense

  1. Interesting thoughts – thank you Donal. You are probably right.

    Perhaps I should rethink my current “who cares about these non-breeding idiots” stance. I figure it’ll be a small footnote in history 100 years from now. However, a generation isn’t very long: only 20-30 years.

    So these fruitcakes have plenty of time to screw up and screw over the next generation of kiddies even more than the current crop.

  2. Coastal

    So I was having a conversation with a friend (a Christian) about this, I got the response of “why does it matter since I’m not a homosexual/let them get married”. I think it’s awfully short-sighted to view this as a non-issue.

    I can see this snowballing into more and more deviance as time goes on, and they’ll be knocking on the church’s door before you know it. ‘Tolerance” isn’t the goal, if you don’t believe that what they’re doing is right, they’ll come for you. The traditional ‘patriarchal’ family structure is a cornesrtone of a succesful society, and it keeps getting maimed by society more and more.

  3. Feminine But Not Feminist

    Reblogged this on Be Feminine, Not Feminist and commented:
    Spreading the word. [Please direct all comments to Donal’s thread for consistency in this case.]

  4. Expressions of faith will be driven into churches. Soon it will be that the only locations where expressions and discussions of faith are permissible will be within the four walls of a church. Absolutely no such expressions, discussions or even displays will be permitted in any public or even private fora, outside a church.

  5. Expressions of faith will be driven into churches. Soon it will be that the only locations where expressions and discussions of faith are permissible will be within the four walls of a church.

    They don’t care about expressions of faith; they care about preventing the teaching of biblical morality, and the church will not be a place that is exempted from having to publicly affirm their behavior.

    My church was already targeted last year:

    When ‘Non-Denominational’ Really Means Homophobic”

    Note this salient quote from the author:

    NorthRidge does not welcome and affirm gay people.

    What does he expect? Affirmation, just as Donal explained in this post.

    I actually believe that more than any other place, churches will be actively sought out as places to enforce the coming requirement for strong verbal affirmation and vocal support for their behavior.

  6. Romans 1:18-32 is instructive for Christians to remember during these days:

    18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

    24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

    26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

  7. Good post, Donal. I’m afraid you’re right on all points.

    I’ve written quite a bit about that pride/shame dichotomy because it permeates every aspect of our culture at the moment. When people have no shame about who and what they are, they don’t require other people’s affirmation and approval. In a Christian context we would lay pride and shame down at the foot of the cross, but in the secular world there is nothing else to do but attempt to annihilate those who you perceive to be the source of your discomfort.

  8. Mrs. C

    Millionaire gay couple sues church for not performing SSM.

    They say “‘It upsets me because I want it so much – a big lavish ceremony, the whole works. He said it was a shame that he and his partner were being forced to take Christians to court to get them to recognise them, but he said the new law did not give them what they have been campaigning for.”

    Epitome of entitlement culture “It upsets me because I want it so much” “The new law did not give them what they have been campaigning for.”

    The legalization of SSM is only a signpost along the road of what they really want, which is Christianity to declare that their relationships are licit and not sinful. You’re right Donal. They won’t stop until they achieve this.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2383686/Millionaire-gay-fathers-sue-Church-England-allowing-married-church.html

  9. A very well reasoned, non-religious case against gay marriage, well worth the read:
    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/06/28/comment-of-the-week-the-norm-equalization-case-against-gay-marriage/

    I don’t know many men who would sign up to an institution where the partners are expected/morally obliged to be emotionally faithful but not sexually faithful. It is much easier for women to get casual sex than men, so any man signing himself up to that deal would be signing himself up for cuckoldry and cuckoldry is the absolute worst thing that can happen to a man pursuing a long-term mating strategy, (and it is the evolved moral norms surrounding the long-term mating strategy which marriage as a cultural institution is/was developed around/for.)

    Of course, if people became more knowledgeable about evo-bio/evo-psych and instead started calling marriage essentially what it is, the social-codification of the long-term mating strategy in humans, then this concern wouldn’t really matter. (No worrying about importing norms anti-thetical to the reproductive interests of one party in the relationship and subsequently which disincentivises the pursuit of the strategy from that party as its definition is strictly evo-bio/evo-psych.)

    (On a side note, the reason I’ve given above is also why I think a lot of religious people are against gay marriage, they fear that it will change the institution and expose them to cuckoldry. This wouldn’t be the first time that religious norms have been developed to prevent cuckoldry/ensure paternal certainty;

    See http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-06/uom-hrp060412.php

    Of course, I doubt these fears will be allayed as doing so would go against the feminist establishment’s desire to create a matriarchial/matrilineal cad society where all men are cuckolds (if they aren’t cads that is), but that’s a whole different issue.)

    Layer on all of the scripture you want, the nuts and bolts of it is that this edict fundamentally restructures the legal aspects of male/female marriage. When this restructuring questions and impedes the access to long-term resource provisioning for divorced women (initiators of 70+% of divorces), that’s when you’ll see a truly misandric inequality in hetero vs. homosexual marriage arrangements. Men will still need to be forced into indenturement and forced to cooperate with a binding commitment to Hypergamy in the face of alternative marriages not based on monogamy.

    […] Let’s say we live in a legal system that protects the long-term mating interests of both a man and woman in a long-term mating relationship. Let’s say this society calls this long-term mating relationship, marriage. Let’s say that the underlying justification for this ‘marriage law’ is the evolutionary principles surrounding mating.

    Let’s then also say that a group to which this ‘marriage law’ does not apply, suddenly want to be included within the same legal construct.

    A married couple in this society want to get divorced. The woman has been adulterous, so the man wants to retract his physical investment in her, which means no providing resources or protection to her. Given that this legal system protects his long-term mating interests, and given that the underlying justification for this protection is the evolutionary principles surrounding mating, the judge allows him to retract his physical investment to the woman.

    Now let’s say that the group to which this ‘marriage law’ does not apply is Gay Men. And let’s say that Gay marriage is passed and they are suddenly allowed to marry.

    And let’s say that the justification for this allowance into the institution is ‘equality’.

    Now let’s also say that because these are gay men we are dealing with, that they do not have the same mating psychologies as heterosexual men and so are perfectly okay with sexual non-monogamy. There is no rule proscribing sex with others outside the marriage within gay long-term relationships.

    Now here is an instance in the penumbra. A gay couple has married, but they want to get divorced. One of them has been adulterous. However, it is argued in court that the norms surrounding gay long-term relationships do not proscribe adultery. Should this adultery factor into the division of assets, the supply of alimony? The exchange of physical investment from one of the men to the other? Is there even an exchange of physical investment? If the underlying basis of ‘marriage law’ are the evolutionary principles surrounding mating, how do you integrate a group of people whose mating behaviours violate those very principles into a system that has been designed to protect the interests conceived of via those principles? It doesn’t make sense to say that in a gay couple one partner can cuckold the other partner. So how can you apply a rule that retracts the physical investment from one party to another, when the basis for the existence of that rule, cuckoldry, doesn’t occur?

  10. theshadowedknight

    Go ahead, sodomites. Strike the Church. Take the Americans and create your dildocracy. We will keep the faith.

    Rome did far worse. We were fed to beasts and murdered for sport. Hiding in catacombs to meet without persecution. Now, Rome belongs to the Catholics, and Constantinople is Orthodox. Keep this up, and Washington and San Francisco will be home to the next great capitol of the faith.

    The Shadowed Knight

  11. Donal, the Orthodox priest on Sunday was even more pointed in his sermon. On our calendar, the Prophet Amos feast day fell on Sunday. He described the situation that was the backdrop for Amos’s prophecy, and then launched into the issues we face. Paraphrasing: “It has come time to realize, perhaps with disappointment, that the ~250 year experiment in ordered liberty has failed, and has failed utterly. Persecution is coming — to your workplaces, to your families, to your neighborhood gatherings. It is coming because this culture no longer serves Christ, and in fact has no interest in serving Him. We MUST resist. We have no option, because they are coming for us — every one of us. The day is coming soon when to disagree with what just happened will simply disqualify you from participating in most of society. We need to prepare for this, because it is going to start happening tomorrow. Resist, and prepare to accept the Cross, because the Cross is what is coming for all of us.”

    Later on in the coffee hour we were chatting and he told me that he plans, together with other EO priests, to stage protests where they will burn marriage certificates (ones that are not filled out — ie, forms). He also told me that he will never sign another marriage certificate again. He will marry people in the Orthodox Church per our canons, of course, but they will need to get the certificate themselves if they want that legal regime — he is bringing the church out of it, and with at least the tacit approval of the bishop.

    This is the way we need to go, Donal. As I wrote on Rod Dreher’s blog, we are going to be faced with the choice between the denial of Peter and acceptance of the Cross of Christ. Most of us, I expect, will choose the former (heck, Peter HIMSELF did), which will reduce our numbers even further.

    We need the Benedict Option. We need to regroup, protect, cultivate ourselves, practice the faith — so that we are strong enough to weather the Tsunami with some people left on the other side.

    Lord have mercy.

  12. Mrs. C

    Novaseeker,

    I’m usually torn between the idea of the Benedict Option and the duty for Christians to serve the world and be in it but not of it. I wonder if there is a way to do both…..

  13. mdavid

    C, I see no contradiction between the BO and engaging the world. Analogy: a medic can only help others by having something to give.

    Liberals love to cry for “Christians stop moralizing and fix our mess!” canard (see: David Brooks). But just keeping one’s family and friends safe in this dark age is an amazing thing and has a massive effect on the world.

  14. It will have to be both. From my perspective, the BO is about finding a way to protect enough so that we are still equipped to be the church in the world, but not living completely away in an enclave. I don’t conceive of it as a Hasidim/Amish idea, really.

    It needs hashing out, however. I sent Rod an email about it over the weekend, but he is in Europe now. More later this summer I’d expect.

  15. Liberals love to cry for “Christians stop moralizing and fix our mess!” canard (see: David Brooks).

    Indeed — he wants us to be “socially useful” — I think Dreher’s take on it was pretty good.

  16. Mrs. C

    Thanks mdavid.

    Novaseeker, The only book I read by Dreher was Crunchy Cons. I did look up his blog and am reading more now. I’ve heard people refer to the Francis option as opposed to the Benedict option but it seems like we need some combination of both.

  17. Frankly, our fabulous overlords don’t have the balls for a serious campaign of persecution involving red martyrs. We may lose our livelihoods. I may be too optimistic here, but I believe Christian business owners will be willing to hire those who have been shamed as badthinkers on social media.

    I will say the other side has us dead to rights when it comes to sound bites. The case against gay “marriage” involves a lot of philosophical reasoning about what men are, what women are, and what marriage is for. They counter it all with, “Love is love! How does it affect you?!” The effects of destroying marriage are not immediately recognizable. It takes some intellectual legwork to make the connection between no fault divorce, illegitimacy, broken homes, and this latest travesty.

    I’m confident that human nature will out. Sexual anarchy is as doomed to fail as Soviet communism was. We probably won’t live to see it, but it will fall.

  18. They counter it all with, “Love is love! How does it affect you?!”

    Well, but this works because that is what marriage is for us straight folk. When we decided that romantic love was the basis of marriage, the goose was cooked. We didn’t see that at the time, but that’s what it was.

    I’ve heard people refer to the Francis option as opposed to the Benedict option but it seems like we need some combination of both.

    We need to stay involved, but we also need a refuge so that we can stay involved. If we remain isolated and exposed to the tsunami, there won’t be enough of us left after the wave crashes to make a difference. That’s the idea — a refuge, but not a hermitage. And, yes, continued involvement with the world, but living in a place that intentionally supports a traditional Christian life.

    Fact is, very very hardy Christians can be very virtuous on their own, but it’s a small number. In the face of a tsunami like we are facing, it’s a tiny number. The BO is trying to address that.

  19. @C —

    You may want to take a look at his Dante book — it’s quite good.

  20. Mrs. C

    @Nova, thanks for the book recommendation. You’re right. Being an isolated Christian in this culture is not good for most.

  21. mdavid

    BL, I agree with your philosophy. The worst punishment for libs? Live well and throw parties and dances without them.

    Once left a liberal parish & was shocked at the angst. I’m sure they didn’t miss me, but sure missed kids & family. Lack of children (raised well) really hurts libs and feminists. Their families are a mess without strong fathers.

  22. Thank you for your responses everyone.

    @ Blackpoisonsoul

    Perhaps I should rethink my current “who cares about these non-breeding idiots” stance. I figure it’ll be a small footnote in history 100 years from now. However, a generation isn’t very long: only 20-30 years.

    In the long run they don’t matter. But in the short run, they most definitely do. We haven’t seen the worst yet. That is yet to come. If we are lucky, things will far apart sooner, rather than later. The longer we put that off, the worse matters will get.

    @ Coastal

    I can see this snowballing into more and more deviance as time goes on, and they’ll be knocking on the church’s door before you know it.

    Exactly. Polygamy and incest aren’t long off. Probably 5-10 years.

    @ Sunshine

    I actually believe that more than any other place, churches will be actively sought out as places to enforce the coming requirement for strong verbal affirmation and vocal support for their behavior.

    I agree. Churches will be the priority target in the near future. Tax exempt status is already being targeted. That will die in to charitable donations. The goal will be to financially strangle churches. The bigger debate, on the other side, at least, will be whether they only target “hateful” religious organizations or all of them.

    @ Mrs. C.

    Your recent post was a major factor in me writing this one. I thought of you and your children, and recognized that they might be safe for the moment, but it won’t last. Public schools won’t be safe for much longer anywhere (personally, I think few are, but I accept for the purposes of argument that there are still good ones out there). Federal funding is a huge thing for them, and the feds can and will use that to enforce their viewpoint.

    @ Rollo

    Thanks for the link

    @ TSK

    I agree that they are doomed. However, I should point out that Constantinople is now called Istanbul, and belongs to Dar Al’Islam, not to the Eastern Church. That result should serve as a stark reminder to us of how important unity is in these times.

  23. mdavid

    RT, Layer on all of the scripture you want, that this edict fundamentally restructures the legal aspects of male/female marriage….men will still need to be forced into indenturement and forced to cooperate with a binding commitment to Hypergamy

    I really think you are fighting a war that is self-correcting. Law is weaker than shame (e.g. there isn’t a law about farting in an elevator). In my circle most men are on kid strike, holding enormous soft power over women who are getting desperate. Look at your own SMV graph and reflect what being a 31 year old unmarried woman who struggles with her weight is like. Look at happiness trends between men & women since 1970. Girls in this generation will not attempt to pull off what their mothers did using law.

  24. @ Nova

    Good for the Orthodox for taking a stand. I hope the Catholic Bishops do the same- at this point we should have no association with anything that the “state” calls “marriage.”

    We need the Benedict Option. We need to regroup, protect, cultivate ourselves, practice the faith — so that we are strong enough to weather the Tsunami with some people left on the other side.

    Amen.

    @ Mrs. C and others

    Regarding the Benedict Option, I don’t think a complete withdrawal is appropriate or necessary. At least, not for everyone. However, those who are most vulnerable (principally the young and unmarried) should be protected as much as possible. I look at it as creating sanctuaries where families can be raised in peace- almost like the Fortress Cathedrals of the old Templars. Places of security and sanctity from which we can venture forth to carry out the Great Commission, as well as pick up the piece of civilization.

    @ Beefy

    Frankly, our fabulous overlords don’t have the balls for a serious campaign of persecution involving red martyrs. We may lose our livelihoods. I may be too optimistic here, but I believe Christian business owners will be willing to hire those who have been shamed as badthinkers on social media.

    This crop of leaders? Yeah, I agree. However, they are being replaced. And they are being replaced by those who are more radical and less timid. Remember, it doesn’t take a lot to get a real persecution going. It doesn’t even have to be bloody in the Roman sense. Going after livelihoods and children is a potent weapon as it is. Don’t count on Christian business owners either- they are guaranteed to be targeted, both by government and mass, private action.

  25. Mrs. C

    @DG ” I thought of you and your children, and recognized that they might be safe for the moment, but it won’t last. Public schools won’t be safe for much longer anywhere (personally, I think few are, but I accept for the purposes of argument that there are still good ones out there). Federal funding is a huge thing for them, and the feds can and will use that to enforce their viewpoint.”

    Pre-SSM legalization, at least in our rural local public school, there is no talk of homosexuality and we’ve never had to deal with our children going to school with kids raised by SS couples. In our little town, we have more leeway with what the state says has to be taught and what a Christian, conservative teacher actually chooses to use from the material when teaching class. They were taught about the risk of AIDS with sexual activity and I didn’t have a problem with that because they do need to know the consequences of sexual activity outside marriage. We have roughly 1000 students total from K to grade 12. Very small and very little surveillance of teachers in the classroom so they can still get around some things. Very little chance of a progressive liberal pushing big agendas on what is taught. There’s still public prayer at graduation and town events. However, Post SSM legalization, I can see that even here there might be more pressure, more oversight, more requirements that overcome the protections we have now. I’ve no doubt that there are progressive liberals around who have different opinions than most around here who have kept quiet. The SCOTUS ruling may embolden them to speak out more and start complaining even if they are largely outnumbered.

    This is why I said I will be watching our school very closely and the minute they start the indoctrination that SSM is normal and equal to marriage, will be the day I homeschool.

    I have always been very open with my children and didn’t shelter them so much that they have no clue about how our secular culture and our Catholic faith collide. I want them to be able to reason and argue our faith when they see things that go against it. My older two daughters know about the SCOTUS ruling. They know what it’s about, they know Catholic teaching and they know how to argue against it. We’ve always had the opinion that rather than sheltering them too much, we are raising warriors who will need to be skilled enough to recognize error in the larger culture and be able to defend against it. I remind them often they may have to be the one to inspire others instead of going along to get along. They know we are a minority in the world outside our little town.

  26. mdavid

    DG, Regarding the Benedict Option, I don’t think a complete withdrawal is appropriate or necessary.

    I hesitate to respond (can’t explain well in a combox) but tangible results from withdrawal-style Benedict Option (stupid name, Dreher clickbait) are truly real. Opposite of the SJW fable. A decade of comments from friends, enemies, priests, family, and even strangers all verify this. The great withdrawal payout? Health and time. Which is then invested in others, especially children and family, but church and community benefit even more.

  27. theshadowedknight

    Donal, the threat may become more pressing as the current elite is replaced with a more radicalized portion, but the return to Christ will give many men a reason to fight, and a cause for which to fight. All of the single men can reform militant orders, at least until they can marry. A Christian organization that provides policing and firefighting, in addition to acting as a deterrent. Many men will have to go without. Christians would be fools not to put them to use.

    The Shadowed Knight

  28. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/07/05) | The Reactivity Place

  29. Feminine But Not Feminist

    Donal, you mentioned discrimination laws in the post. Well, there’s now been one introduced as of now…

    http://winteryknight.com/2015/07/24/democrats-equality-act-will-threaten-religious-liberty-in-all-50-states/

    A quote from Wintery Knight from his post:

    But this “Equality Act” bill would make all 50 states allow these kinds of punishments against people who disagree with same-sex marriage. The laws really are anti-religious-liberty laws, because they force you to agree with the gay agenda, or else face consequences. They force you to violate your conscience, just because you don’t agree with redefining marriage. If this law passes, it means that anyone who disagrees with gay marriage being the same as child-centered natural marriage would be a potential target for the federal government.

    …. Le Sigh…

  30. Not surprised in the slightest FBNF. Perhaps I was overly generous in my time-frame.

  31. Feminine But Not Feminist

    Perhaps. 🙂

    I’m not surprised either, as it’s getting harder and harder to really be surprised about these things anymore, with them being so commonplace. Very discouraging, that.

    I dread to think of what the next awful thing will be. I’m sure I’ll find out soon enough.

  32. Pingback: Donal Graeme

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s