#but every other vote is valid too because you really can't go wrong here

[dangerouseggwolfangel]

Holy crap, what is wrong with people?!

I'm hearing of people receiving death threats over a stupid popularity contest. Of voice actors getting harassed by salty people. This is wild!

I thought the Camilla hate in CYL 3 was horrible but at least there were no death threats (that I know of) and people didn't harass her VA or the Fates team or anyone. Man, I'm sorry for you all Gatekeeper fans that have to put up with this crap, and I'm sorry for McCarley.

The "Fire Emblem fans" that complained to him personally on Twitter are not clowns, they are the entire circus! How did they come to the conclusion that what they did was in any way reasonable? Even if there was actually something wrong with GK's high placement (like botted votes) you should go complain to IS, not some innocent voice actor.

Sheesh, it's scary what this popularity contest can do to people. It's a good thing I don't use twitter and can't see the worst of it.

But even here I see some bad takes that put a bad taste in my mouth. What I'm about to say should be obvious to anyone over the age of 6 but maybe some of you never grew up.

Everyone is allowed to their opinion, but you also have to RESPECT people who have the opposite opinion as you.

Just because you can't see anything good about a character it doesn't mean that something isn't there, just that the character is not for you. And there's no such thing as a "fake character" or "unworthy character".

Every single character votable in CYL has a personality and a role they play.

Even the one-off bosses like Gromell (his personality is being cocky and dumb), Haitaka (his personality is being extremely loyal to his country and nationalistic) and Brigand Boss (his personality is being a low-life as*hole who kidnaps young girls to do horrible things to them. Completely unredeemable bad guy).

And for the rare cases like Cain from Thracia and his one line of dialogue, or Altina and her zero lines of dialogue, getting in the game can be an opportunity to actually give them a personality. It worked wonders for Altina and other very minor characters like Ronan, Mustafa and Leila, so what's the loss if a character wins/gets in instead of another?

No vote is a wrong vote, and no character is a non-character, least of all the sweet Gatekeeper, so stop being mean to him!

And Gatekeeper supporters, don't think you are completely off the hook. I've seen some of you acting pretty bad too (bad apples are in every group larger than 5 people after all). You are right to defend your fave, but don't do so by saying he has way more personality and character than Chrom (worded in a way to make it seem like Chrom has no personality) to the Chrom stans for example. It's possible to praise a character without bringing every other character down, and every single votable character is surely someone's favorite and there really is no need to call them bad and boring and their fans stupid. Remaining civilized and being careful not to be mean to other people even unintentionally should be the main goal here. At the end of the day this game could close down before they even make this year's brave banner so what's the point of fighting like animals?

To all the people who vote for a top scoring character hoping that they can keep their position or rise to the podium, you are all valid.

And to all the people who are voting other characters, keep doing you! Your fave isn't less deserving of a vote than any other character who is more "popular" or "important".

Anyway, before I forget, I voted for Eirika today too, gotta keep her first.

[jeanjauthor]

What makes a person good but seems bad to other people

Hoo boy, this is opening a can o' worms here...

I'm going to give you some really harsh real-world examples, then delve into why these things so disparate on the surface versus underneath. Why? Because a huge chunk of it is all about perspective and point-of-view.

1. People insisting on everyone wearing masks & keeping 6+feet (2+meters apart . . . is GOOD. Republicans insist this is bad. Despite the fact it would literally save their own lives as well as their loved ones, neighbors, strangers--saving lives is GOOD--they abso-fucking-lutely refuse to do it, citing "it's m'gawd given right!!" to not do so. (Sounds like their "god" is the goddamn Devil if you ask me, but I digress.)

The GOP leadership is desperate to keep driving a wedge between their voter base and their political opponents, and have literally done their best to brainwash entire generations to think that anything a Democrat / liberal person says is Evil Incarnate And Must Be Opposed. If their base ever wakes up, they'll stop voting for the people doing everything in their power to keep killing some of them off so they can keep the rest too scared of Voting Any Other Way to, well, vote any other way.

2. People insisting that universal medical care is GOOD (and literally cheaper than what we're currently doing) . . . and again, Republicans whining about how it just can't be done, how DARE we even try . . . because they're depending on the obscene levels of profit their leadership is raking in off of Big Medicine and Big Pharma. So the GOP leadership pushes hard to block every single measure, since it would restore insulin and epipen costs back down to affordability, and that would make them omfg so much less mega-rich than before!!!11!1!11111!1!!1!!!!!

3. People insisting that the money spent on sending rich people to space (and bringing them back safely) should instead be spent on helping society at large . . . and all of Musk's fanbois whining about HOW DARE YOU DOUBT THE VALIDITY OF THE NARCISSISTIC NEEDS OF OUR GLORIOUS TECH LEADER!!!!111!1!!!!!1!1!!

...Don't get me wrong. I genuinely like the Tesla Roof, the whole concept of it, and things like electric cars are a vital part of shifting from reliance on dwindling climate-wrecking & ecology-wrecking fossil fuels to renewable energy, etc, etc. One day, I'd like to be able to get an e-car myself! But remember, that same "techboi guru" Musk is scabbing his own workers' strike to try to force people to work in an increasingly dangerous pandemic because it's hurting his bottom line. Without any regard to his workers' safety & good health. etc. Insisting tht he be taxed so that he can no longer afford to play astronaut would literally mean saving millions of American lives which is a GOOD thing...but he insists it's a bad thing, and he's got his whole fanboi chorus brainwashed into screaming his message, rather than the truth.

4. I got shot, so I punched the guy for hurting me. No, seriously, this is a true example from my childhood. When I was just 7, I was at my grandparents' in the summer, and got very sick. So sick, they drove me to the hospital, thinking I had appendicitis. Turns out I just had a very bad stomach flu. (This was back in the days before those fancy drip regulation machines.)

I'd been vomiting a lot, was very dehydrated, and so the nurse explained she was going to be putting fluids into me via an i.v., that she was not going to take any blood out of me (which you'll admit is a scary thing for a little kid to see)...except she did it wrong and some of my blood got up into the clear plastic tubing. I. Freaked. Out. 4th of July, FAR from home, no parents, no grandparents at this point, in the hands of strangers, she was doing a technically good-for-me-thing, and I had just been LIED to.

Fast forward a few weeks, I go in to see the doctor, apparently I'm supposed to get my regular vaccination shot for going into the 2nd grade--this is a GOOD thing, getting shot. The doctor sticks a needle in lil 7yo me...and I punch him. Right in the cheek, rocked him almost off the stool he was sitting on. Surprised the heck outta him. Surprised the heck outta me, but my brain just immediately went into BAD THING HAPPENING WITH NEEDLES, MUST HURT HIM TO MAKE IT STOP!!!!11!!!!1!!1!! To this day, I have a severe needle phobia.

...And to bring this full circle, it took all my courage and strength to get the COVID shots and to get the flu shots these last two years. I know that getting shot is a good thing, but my hindbrain screams BAD THING HAPPENING every single time.

...

All of these things are a matter of perspective.

Each of these is an objectively good thing--not subjectively, not opinion-based, but fact based objectively good things going on here. Vaccines are a good thing, masking up and staying apart are good things, medical care that nobody has to pay for outside of taxes is a great thing, making rich people go back to paying taxes above a reasonable income level is a great thing, because that would pay for the medical care of everyone, me enduring getting shot with said vaccine is a good thing despite my extreme phobia, etc, etc...

But it's not viewed as such from the perspectives of those who are brainwashed, traumatized, and/or selfish asshats enough to want to win a stupid numbers game by destroying others' lives.

Here's another example, paraphrased from one of Mercedes Lackey's novels (Valdemar universe).

1. Newcomer is Secret Santa to a community, but they can only view him as a Would-Be Murderer.

The example is that say you've got a retired mercenary, he's very wealthy because he was very successful at doing what mercenaries do best in a sword & sorcery universe: fighting & killing for hire. He always tried to pick the righteous side, does his best, and eventually retires and moves into a village. But the non-fighter locals eye him with distrust because of his former career. He tries to make friendly overtures and is rebuffed, but he still wants to do good, so he sends his servants out to secretly and anonymously pay off debts, fix fences, bring in extra grain when a harvest is poor, going out personally to track down and bring to justice any would-be brigands in the area, so on and so forth, because he has all that money, he wants to do good, and this is the only way he can do it that the locals will accept, aka anonymously.

And then one day while he's walking through town, a stranger visiting the area confronts him, they get into a fight, and the mercenary is forced to cut down the stranger, just to defend his own life, because the stranger will not stop attacking him. Although he didn't start it, rumors spread that the stranger was an old enemy coming to avenge fallen comrades, etc. Whether or not this may be true, the perspective of the fearful townsfolk is that This Mercenary Is A Murderer!!!111!1!1!!!1!1!!11!, despite the fact the mercenary didn't want to kill and only ended up doing so to save his own life (a good thing both subjectively for the merc, and objectively for the town which is being supported & protected by his silent good deeds).

To the merc's loyal retainers, he is a good, just, and kind man who is making the world better. To the ignorant villagers, he is a cruel, mean, and vicious killer whom they had best keep their children away from.

To mask-wearers and vaccination-accepters, getting the vaccine is good. To Republican leaders, acknowledging that it's good would destroy their voter base because those voters would flee from their lies...so they do everything they can to make their Republican voters think that vaccines are bad, healthcare is just fine as it is, and there's no money anywhere whatsoever to pay for all of it.

. . . As writers, we need to be able to view things from multiple perspectives, to be able to understand others' viewpoints so that we can write believable and/or realistic protagonists, antagonists, heroes, villains, sidekicks, henchmen, secondary characters, so on and so forth.

It is not a very comfortable position to be in, straddling multiple points-of-view. Especially idiotic and/or villainous points of view. Yet it is a very powerful storytelling tool. Even if you stick to one POV in telling a story, you'll still need to be able to see what the villain is thinking & why they're acting the way that they act. You don't have to accept these alternate viewpoints, but they are important for making a story more believable.

Just...use this power wisely.

Don't brainwash people into killing themselves for your vainglory.

[feelingbluepolitics]

(* Many thanks, always, to @catbirdseat4u )

This article is, in essence, a political biography of Elizabeth Warren. It gets a Highest recommendation, and it should be made clear that this recommendation carries no disclaimer. To the contrary, here's a proclamation in support of Warren Democrats.

"Ms. Warren’s political awakening didn’t simply happen all at once. Her road to Damascus was a long one. But over several decades, she transformed from a largely pro-business and politically disengaged academic — a sort of default Republican — to a fierce consumer advocate and bankruptcy expert whose advice was sought on Capitol Hill, and then, finally, to a Democratic force on the Hill herself.

..."The revelations from her bankruptcy research, by her account, became the seeds of her worldview, laid out in her campaign plans for everything from a new tax on the wealthiest Americans to a breakup of the big technology companies."

One discussion featured in this article is that, because Warren is a "fierce advocate," perhaps she will make people uncomfortable. Perhaps she will have trouble building a favorable Electoral College vote -- for, hopefully, one of the last times that will matter.

Not to dismiss those concerns, but to put them in a fundamental context: every presidential candidate, "fierce" or not, faces those same concerns.

The emphasis there is completely mistaken, in any event. The emphasis more properly belongs on advocate. Yet any politician is, by definition, an advocate, and so are, ideally, parents, teachers, coaches, certainly lawyers, as that's their job, and technically even bosses, who are supposed to bring out the best their people can offer and aim it toward a goal to be accomplished. We all know, one way or another, how iffy the realities of advocacy are.

What's really at issue, is that advocates need people to listen to their advocacy, so what we are talking about -- of course -- is actually leadership.

It's true that there are leaders who don't listen to anyone. Perhaps they think this shows strength, or decisiveness, but what it really shows is the weakness of their leadership, and also, usually, that they are assholes whom most people do not like.

Good leaders, strong leaders, bring people along with them, and the only way to do that is to listen, and listen wisely.

So here are some thoughts on leadership, listening, and listening wisely, and why these are pivotal, and how it has gone for the US and Americans to have too little of these features in our politics.

There's not a Republicon politician in the country who does not listen, with the closest possible attention, to their biggest money donors who can help them get re-elected, by funding the means to advertise to more people with more targeted frequency.

There's been too much of that on both sides. This is how corporate depravity -- with its interest in working for and listening only to extremely wealthy corporate shareholders -- has come to be in charge of running the country. It's in every branch of our government, even seeping into the judiciary to make justice, and even access to the civil courts, a perk, a game, a threat, a strategy, for the very rich.

The backlash to Americans not being listened to in our politics is what opened that inexpensive door for Russia to root around in our politics by way of social media. We were and are vulnerable to cyber-warfare through friendly sounding personal messaging, because we want to both hear and be heard. That's how on-line radicalization works too.

When we can't see the money or the bigger picture, the data-mined "personal" approach, valid or not, feels like authentic outreach. It's only going to become more confusing, in the absence of adequate social media safeguards, as we further adapt our actual political outreach to social media as well.

But the political problems related to listening have long been pervasive. Some think Dubya's looking better by comparison to trump, but the truth is that the Bush presidency was disastrous because when he listened, it was to the wrong people. Katrina and the Iraq war are deep and permanent disfigurations both on Dubya and the country. We keep saying we can do better. But then we don't.

Dubya's terrible failings actually ran in the family, in terms of talking to and listening to the wrong people.

https://static.theintercept.com/amp/the-ignored-legacy-of-george-h-w-bush-war-crimes-racism-and-obstruction-of-justice.html

Obama stands out as an American leader most of the world -- other than Putin and Republicons -- talked with and listened to willingly, bringing a sense of stability and progress to many.

He also was, as we knew all along and as we can see now, a messenger -- simply by way of being elected president -- who terrified those most deserving of being judged harshly. They couldn't and wouldn't, ever, listen to him or accept anything he said.

Aside from all that is happening in this country, trump is a complete disaster on the world stage. The one example to truly chalk up to trump's world "leadership" is the utter atrocity of Brazil's Bolsonaro, connected inseparably with the raging destruction of the Amazon rain forest.

trump is in the Oval Office as a consequence of failed listening, otherwise described as the pervasive political disconnect too many Americans feel. Nearly all of us want safety from gun violence, economic security, equal rights, reproductive choice, and access to health care that we can afford to use. And yet we are a country hugely polarized into political tribes, with most of us not participating at all.

Many people villified Hillary, because that's the kind of thing people often will listen to. Many people didn't pay attention to the fact that she was the first candidate, ever, to run on a family, women, and children political platform, or that she had spent her entire public service career, both politically and charitably, committed to that exact platform, while she could also bring intensively knowledgeable global leadership.

Many people didn't acknowledge that of Bernie's ideas which were more progressive and hugely popular, Hillary listened, and adopted.

But the biggest failure leading to trump is the many people who aren't listening politically at all anymore, and those who are too angry to listen and willing instead to destroy the system rather than try to fix it.

Listening must go both ways. That's why we need big changes, in order to get there. Warren came into politics as an advocate who had listened, as this article shows.

She is the candidate for people like this:

- "Sometimes I get really worried about the climate. We have to start doing something, but I don't know what I can do."

- "If I get hit with one more extra bill to pay, I don't know if we can make it. I don't know what might happen to us."

- "I worry that we aren't strong enough if one of us gets sick! The money, the time, our jobs! It will ruin us."

- "That job won't cover my rent."

- "My mom's not feeling well. What am I supposed to do with my kids while I'm at work?"

- "This stupid thing is trash, but they won't fix it! I don't have the money for another one!"

On the other hand, Elizabeth Warren won't be the choice for people who get mad about having to contribute their two cents...on every dollar over their first $50 million.

Try listening to Elizabeth Warren. See if she's been listening to people who sound like you.

[anthonychiozza]

The Genocide Of The Innocent: Reprint From 12/19/15

    Written by: Anthony Chiozza

Hearing about babies dissected alive could lead one to despair easily. Those that are still in touch with their own soul feel an anger, and deep pain that can not be adequately communicated with the pen. Children of God for Life’s facebook page states the following: “Dr. Ian Donald explained what he witnessed at Karolinska Institute to Fr Paul Marx at HLI several years ago: Experiments were being performed on near-term alive aborted babies who were not even afforded the mercy of anesthetic as they writhed and cried in agony, and when their usefulness had expired, they were executed and discarded as garbage.” Difficult words to read for those with a soul. (1) For the record, the Karolinska Institute is located in Sweden. (2) However, the United States, Planned Parenthood, and the citizens of this country have enough blood on their hands as well, as revealed by the recent Planned Parenthood “scandal.” The only scandal that I am aware of is that millions of babies have been exterminated for years.

    There are not enough human tears to be wept that can make up for the atrocities committed against the weakest of the human species. Perhaps you have considered that I sound more like a humanist than a Catholic, but let me assure you that I fully expect God’s wrath to pour out upon this disgusting, “modern” society sooner rather than later. Some people hear, “God’s Wrath,” and they assume that this is some kind of evil God that enjoys punishing people. My theology might be off on this, but in any case, this is how my perception of this concept works itself out in my mind. God loves us so much that He weeps while having to destroy us, because we have rejected His love. If we think back to Scripture Jesus sheds tears on Jerusalem. His own people did not accept His Love, and Rome would decimate the city precisely as Jesus prophesized. Further, God’s Chastisements can also lead many to repent before death, and spare them an eternal death in hell.

For the record, I used to vote for politicians that murder babies. I was once  a full functioning member of the “Culture of Death,” in almost every regard. I have, through God’s mercy, had the good fortune to be slapped awake by Him, and I confessed those sins. These are just some of my sins, but how many pretend there is some subtle discussion to have about voting for millions of babies being slaughtered, while weighing the economic pros and cons? This cannot be considered clear reasoning. Considering if one should vote liberal to stop war is a more valid line of reasoning to follow, but also a line of reasoning that ultimately fails. Surely, liberals would continue to vote democrat if we were murdering Jews at home, but wanted to avoid killing others in wars abroad? I can hear the discussion now. “Well it is true that ‘Feel the Burn’ Sanders and Hillary want to keep murdering Jews in our country, but at least people won’t die in war abroad.” There is no subtle discussion to be had here.

    War is upon us, and it has been upon us for a long time, and many lives will be lost in war. Even under supposedly liberal leadership the slaughter of war continues, and whose fault is that? Those that have held the reigns of power in the past are guilty. Specifically, the Bush administration, which was fully stocked with a gaggle of neoconservatives. We cannot leave out Hillary Clinton, as she voted for the unjust war as well. The neocons didn’t listen to Saint John Paul II when he said they could not go to war in the middle east! “John Paul has insisted that war is a "defeat for humanity" and that a preventive strike against Iraq is neither legally nor morally justified.” (3)

     News flash for the Liberals out there laughing at the Neocons’ clouded reason, and disobedience to the Holy Father. Democrats have supported genocide much longer than any Republican Neocon, that didn’t listen to the Pope concerning the wars in the Middle East. This is not an excuse for the Bush administration’s disobedience to the Pope, but an important theological point! War is a punishment for the very crimes Liberals continue to support, by voting for leadership that is willing to sacrifice babies at Lucifer’s alter. When Our Lady of Fatima appeared to three shepherd children she confirmed Scripture, that war is indeed a punishment for sin. (4) (5)

    Again, why do Liberals continue to vote this way even though many of them are Catholic?  This vote is in trade for some false perception of economic advantage, or a misguided line of reasoning thinking we will spare lives by preventing war. I hear the emotional counter arguments now: “But if the economy is better, women will kill less babies.” Studying the statistics it does seem that the majority of abortions are happening for a lack of affordability. However, upon further investigation of the reasoning behind these decisions, and breaking down the data into subcategories, one must admit that affordability is highly subjective in the mind of the individual. The following statistics began being collected in 1986 and were published in 2005.

“Nearly three-quarters said they could not afford to have a baby.

Of those women who gave two or more answers, the most common response -- inability to afford a baby -- was most frequently followed by one of three other reasons:

Pregnancy/birth/baby would interfere with school or employment.

Reluctant to be a single mother or experiencing relationship problems.                       Done with childbearing or already have other children/dependents.

Below is

a breakdown of women's responses that

specified reasons that led to their abortion

decision

(percentage total will not add up to 100% as multiple answers were permissible):

74% felt "having a baby would dramatically change my life" (which includes interrupting education, interfering with job and career, and/or concern over other children or dependents)

73% felt they "can't afford a baby now" (due to various reasons such as being unmarried, being a student, inability to afford childcare or basic needs of life, etc.)

48% "don't want to be a single mother or [were] having relationship problem[s]" (6) (8)

  Only one reason listed seems to actually correlate with, “inability to afford a baby.” That reason is, “inability to afford basic needs of life.” The rest seem to be highly westernized ideas about “affordability.” There are women in dire poverty all around the world having babies, including the United States. For the sake of argument I will admit it is possible that these other categories might include some legitimate economic reasons, but that, of course, does not excuse the sin. When the statistics are broken down further we begin to get a clearer picture that these reasons are westernized reasons. Only twenty-three percent of abortions are because of affordability. Sixty-six percent of these abortions are happening for reasons other than affordability and that is without the health of the mother, or rape included! (7) In fairness two categories, or more, could be chosen by the woman filling out the form. Sixty-six percent is the best estimate that can made.  The percentage could be less.

Why Women Have Abortions:

The reasons they gave in 2004

25% Not ready for a(nother) child/timing is wrong

23% Can't afford a baby now

19% Have completed my childbearing/have other people depending on me/children are grown

8% Don't want to be a single mother/am having relationship problems

7% Don't feel mature enough to raise a(nother) child/feel too young

4% Would interfere with education or career plans

4% Physical problem with my health

3% Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus

<0.5% Was a victim of rape

<0.5% Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion

<0.5% Parents want me to have an abortion

<0.5% Don't want people to know I had sex or got pregnant

6% Other (7)

   Did voting Democrat ever stop 23% of these babies from being murdered? It would be interesting to break the statistics down further and see if the number of abortions in that category rose during the years of Democratic presidents. We obviously know that babies were murdered for that reason, in those years despite the numbers, so voting Democrat will never stop this from happening.  We always hear from Liberal Left about how much the government cares for everyone. Why don’t they care enough to use tax money to save babies instead of funding their genocide? Catholic Democrats hold up a magic economic key and argue they can stop allowing genocide, or at least most of it, if you will just vote for their party. I can hear the conversation with them continue, “We can save some of the Jews, even though we are the ones throwing them in the ovens, if you just vote for our party.”

    Turning back to the Republican side of the isle, can any Catholic clearly give me Donald Trump’s position on abortion? He seems to be all over the place.(9) Right now, apparently, it is not ok to kill babies in the Don’s mind, except for certain situations. This flies in the face of his previous position of being pro-abortion. He wouldn’t consider defunding Planned Parenthood, but maybe he will now? Who really knows? (Update: Thank God for President Trump. Could he still be critiqued? Yes, but he has done more than any other sitting POTUS that I can recall.) 

     Meanwhile we have candidates like Rand Paul, willing to stand on the Senate floor for hours filibustering, in order to defund Planned Parenthood! How can Conservative Catholics even seriously consider Trump when there are candidates that are more experienced, in regards to defending the country, and trying to save the unborn? Not only are they experienced, but they have proven they will fight the good fight! If Rubio shows up he might fight, I don’t know, probably not...I digress...The story recently broke that Planned Parenthood will be fully funded. Go back and read Dr. Donald’s witness testimony about babies screaming in pain as they are torn apart.

    What should Catholics be doing other than praying the rosary, to end this nightmare? I have personally heard at least two Priests, and read on EWTN that it is a mortal sin to vote for someone that supports abortion. The voters guide on EWTN by Father Taraco, Ph.D. states, “Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.” (8)I would respectfully recommend that Trump supporters click the link in the source list below to the Catholic Answers article and consider if they are making the right moral decision weighing all the other candidates positions.

    It would follow that a good Catholic would make a prudent decision, even if they were still unsure, and follow what these good sources of Catholic teaching are saying. Unfortunately, Catholics in the United States continue to march us backwards into darkness. It would be impossible for politicians that condone the genocide of babies to be elected in this country if Catholics would actually be Catholic. For some inexplicable reason they choose not to follow the Church, but their own wills, desires, and political leanings. If only they were obedient like the Queen Mother Mary, to her Son, they might not only find that abortions end, but that the economy would also improve. Perhaps we might get more worthy candidates to vote for on both sides of the narrow political spectrum in this country as well! How many Catholics will continue to do their will and not the Father’s Will?  For now, “we the Catholic people,” seem to want more bread and circus in exchange for the blood of the innocent. Update 1: Ladies and Gentleman, I have a serious question, and thought experiment. Apparently the five non negotiables are not Catholic teaching when it comes to voting. Pope Benedict said, in a letter, that one could vote for a pro-abortion candidate, but NOT because they are pro-abortion. I can find nothing that carries the weight of encyclical that says otherwise. However, I still feel in my heart, very strongly, that it is wrong to vote for a pro-abortion candidate. My thinking relies on a statement from Pope John Paul II: "That is the dignity of America, the reason she exists, the condition of her

survival, yes, the ultimate test of her greatness: to respect every human person,

especially the weak and most defenseless ones, those as yet unborn."

-Pope John Paul II 

I feel Saint Pope John Paul II's desire for America will never be accomplished here if Catholics are free to vote for pro-abortion candidates because they like other parts of that candidates platform. The analogy I think of to explain this to people follows as: Do you think everyone would be trying to make the best choice while people are being marched off to the ovens and just kind of toss their hands and their air, and say, "Well, I don't agree with them burning those Jews, but they have a great economic policy, so I'll vote for them." Anyway, these are just my thoughts on why I think it should not be allowed for Catholics to ever vote for a pro-abortion candidate, but I accept that I am probably wrong. My heart tells me never to vote that way personally. Thanks for the thoughtful consideration. I offer my sincere apologies to those Catholics that choose to vote for pro-abortion candidates. God bless.

Update II: A good friend of mine sent me another article today from a Priest on the issue of abortion. I feel it is important for everyone to form their conscience appropriately on this issue. I would respectfully ask that everyone read this, whether conservative, or liberal. When Pope Benedict said it would not be a grave evil to vote for a pro-abortion candidate, it was in the context of a letter. This is far from an encyclical, or words spoken from the Chair of Peter. This was his opinion. While I respect his opinion, and believe he was a great Pope, my heart tells me he is very wrong. A Pope is a man as well, and can be mistaken in matters of the Faith. Even a great Pope like Benedict. It is important that we all SERIOUSLY consider our position on this issue before casting a vote that could possibly send us to hell. I am so concerned about this, specifically because of the salvation of my soul, and other souls, I am considering writing a second piece on abortion and voting. Please pray for my soul. LINK: https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2016/03/03/can-catholics-support-a-pro-abortion-candidate/

​Citations:

Debi Vinnedge, President and Executive Director, “Children of God For Life,” Nov. 9, 2015, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=905776096177162&id=223315007756611&fref=nf&pnref=story

(2) Dr Cecilia Götherström, Associate Professor, “Unique stem cell brittle-bone study starts,” Oct. 12, 2015 0 2:00 EST, accessed Dec. 17, 2015,

http://news.cision.com/karolinska-institutet/r/unique-stem-cell-brittle-bone-study-starts,c9844692

(3) Associated Press, “ Vatican Strongly Opposes Iraq War,” March 12, 2003, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/03/12/vatican-strongly-opposes-iraq-war.html

(4) Father Nicholas Gruner, “ Part I – The Urgency of the Fatima Message,” unkown, acessed, Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.fatima.org/books/divimp/dichap1.asp

(5) Catholic Answers Staff, “ Does God Send War As Punishment For Sin,” unknown, accessed Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/does-god-send-wars-as-a-punishment-for-sin

(6)  Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frohwirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh and Ann M. Moore “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions :  Quantiative and Qualitative  Perspectives,” September 2005, accessed Nov. 17, 2015,

https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf

(7) Gudrun Shultz, “The Real Reason Women Choose Abortion,” unkown, accessed, Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.actionlife.org/index.php/life-issues/abortion/item/124-the-real-reason-women-choose-abortion

(8) Linda Lowen, “Why Women Choose Abortion - Statistical Breakdown of Reasons For Abortion,” Dec. 16, 2014, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionReasons_2.htm

(10) Fr. Stephen F. Torraco, PhD, “A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters,” 2002, accessed Dec. 17, 2015,

https://www.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:(Statue)_Stop_Abortion._University_of_Ilorin.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

Women’s Rights Photo: Kenneth John Gill

(9) Bethany Blankley, “Donald Trump’s Abortion Muddle,” Dec. 5, 2015, accessed Dec. 18, 2015,

undefined

[thegreymoon]

Hi I have been a fan of your work for a very long time and so I sneak into your tumblr from time to time.I counldnt help but notice that you post a lot of political/sjw stuff and I know it is none of my business but since I am probably absolutely opposite in my political views I can't help myself and ask: I understand that you are Asian, but you don't seem to be interested in real or imagined injustices in your country/continent and are mainly interested in USA, why is that?

Hi, anon!

First of all, I am not Asian and I’m very sorry if I ever did or said anything to mislead people into thinking that I was. It was unconsciously done. I have no intention of offending anyone or appropriating an identity that isn’t mine, so if I did something of that sort, please let me know and I’ll do my best to correct myself. I often reblog stuff about China because I think it’s an amazing country, I’m learning Mandarin (not making much progress, though), love their culture, nature, architecture and am a big fan of their historical/fantasy dramas. Also, the two fandoms I was the most active in (coincidentally) happen to be a Japanese anime and a Japanese video game, so I have a lot of love for their art and aesthetics.

I’m actually very surprised that you would ‘notice’ that I post a lot of ‘political/sjw stuff’, considering that I mostly use Tumblr to repost Merlin gifs, cast/crew news and fanworks. There is maybe one reblog on just about anything else for every fifty (perhaps even more) Merlin posts, so I really have to wonder which of the RL issues I posted about bothered you so much that you would describe them as ‘a lot’.

I may be misinterpreting the tone of your ask, so forgive me if I misread your intentions and am responding too harshly, but in my experience, ‘SJW’ is a term that is used to be dismissive when people are talking about real social issues, plus I found your wording of ‘imagined injustices’ very… interesting.

Also, I find it odd that somebody would unironically ask me why I’m ‘mainly’ interested in the USA.

First of all, the global market is oversaturated with American media, American products, American news, American movies, TV series, music, you name it. It’s everywhere. Of course I’m going to know more about it than, say, Lichtenstein. The exposure of American public figures is insane and it just happens that the stuff that appears on my dash is most often related to the USA because that is what the people I follow also follow (and for the record, on Tumblr, I mainly follow the Merlin fandom and to a somewhat lesser degree, various artists, baby animals, Chinese traditional outfits, Buzzfeed and NASA news). I absolutely do reblog pure evil, injustices, hypocrisy and intentionally inflicted misery in other countries too when I see them, but I don’t actively go looking for them on Tumblr, just like I don’t actively look for the USA posts either. The USA posts are simply there, without much active input from me, while other countries are not. An important point, of course, since we are having this weird discussion about why a random person outside of the USA is consuming so much American media, is that English is the only foreign language I am fluent in, so when it comes to foreign content, I am primarily going to read and interact with posts in English. And which country creates the most content in English? Yup, you guessed it!  

On a similar note, everything that happens in the USA affects other countries too. Nothing that goes on there takes place in a vacuum and the USA has made damn sure that it has its fingers in each and every single pie all over the world. Everything, the good and the bad, spills over and trust me, we feel the effects acutely in my unstable, politically fraught little country. The economic and cultural implications are enormous, so you can bet American issues are very personal for me, even if I don’t live there. My country’s government consists of puppets in the hands of various world leaders playing tug of war with actual human lives. My literal paycheck depends on the stability of the dollar. The survival of the entire human species hangs on how we deal with climate change right now and that ignorant, illiterate orange shitstain Americans voted into power is now standing on a global platform, spouting nonsense that is barely one step removed from Creationist bullshit and Flat-earther conspiracies. And you seriously ask me why I’m interested in the USA? 

The USA loves to dub itself as ‘the leader of the free world’ and ‘a global superpower’, and has managed to stick its nose into everybody’s business everywhere (usually with no good intentions), but somehow you question why the rest of us are now going to be interested in what is going on there, not to mention critical when the US government spouts absolute rubbish not just on a domestic, but also global scale? So, yes, I am personally invested in what is going down next in the USA and am sitting here, half the world across, cheering Americans on as they fight to have that shame they elected removed from power and, hopefully, incarcerated, along with all his corrupt cronies, advisors and family members. I’m going to be genuinely celebrating here when he finally goes down!

Secondly, I come from one of those countries that the USA and its allies have destroyed for their own gain and where they have ruined countless lives over multiple generations. I have every reason to notice, take a personal interest in and comment on the hypocrisy, the grandstanding and the false moral high ground that is assumed by the USA (and any of its bootlickers) when I see it.

For any of my USA followers here, I would just like to note that I am perfectly capable of distinguishing between ordinary people and disgusting government policies enacted by corrupt or incompetent politicians. I realise this post sounds angry, but I wish only good things for you all, people are people everywhere and the stuff I’m talking about is way above the average person’s paygrade. I also realise that the USA has screwed over so many of its own citizens; including its war veterans, PoC, minorities, the poor, the weak and the disabled. My heart goes out to you all, truly, and I love you all!

(BTW, I intentionally have not said which country I’m from because I’ve stopped publically stating my location online, simply because it makes it too easy for malicious people to identify me IRL that way. I don’t necessarily hide my RL identity if I have a valid reason to reveal my true name and location, but please forgive me for not stating it outright here, on a public platform, to satisfy the curiosity of an anon ask. My country is misogynistic, homophobic and hostile to all who are non-conforming and my job prospects are hard enough without my online pseudonyms being generally known in my RL circles. I used to be much less secretive about it, but have since learned the error of my ways and am now taking the most basic of precautions.)

With that said, yes, my country has issues! And, fyi, I have ranted and raged and cried about them before online, IRL and in private. I have posted about my country’s political problems everywhere, including here, when I was just too angry to hold it in because I’m absolute shit at being careful even when I make a conscious effort to be. Most recently, I raged about our elections which were a punch to the gut. If I was to start typing about the corruption, injustices and absolute evil going on around me, I would never stop, but I’m not going to do that because that’s not what I come to Tumblr for. This is primarily a fandom space, mostly for fandom stuff, where I come to look at other people’s things and almost never create content of my own. Just about anything political has been reblogged from someone else because it showed up on my dash and touched a nerve. Very little of that is stuff from my own country because nobody creates and reblogs posts about it in the fandom circle I mostly interact with.

I’m now trying to think back to what ‘SJW’ issues (as you put it) I reblog the most often and how any of them are ‘imaginary injustices’. Off the top of my head, the ones that usually touch a nerve are about the oppression and discrimination of women, patriarchy, sexism, various kinds of abuse, sexual assault, overworking, capitalist brainwashing, mental health issues, LGBTQ issues, freedom of speech, resurgence of Nazism, the gap between the rich and the poor, climate change and criminal religious institutions regaining power in society. I can assure you that none of these is ‘imaginary’ and the negative ways in which they affect me and the people around me are very, very real. Also, none of them is unique to the USA, which is what you seem to be the most concerned about, and even if the post is from or about the USA, these problems definitely overlap with things that I, and countless people around the world, are personally experiencing and have a lot of feelings about. The only social issues ‘unique’ to the USA that I often reblog are the ones related to the particular US brand of racism and the appalling, still-ongoing genocide committed against the indigenous people there, and how can you not empathise with that when it’s so egregious? I will reblog them every time they cross my dash to spread awareness since the US government is actively trying to stifle it and rewrite history and idc who is uncomfortable.

With all that said, I’m open to corrections and have no problem admitting to being wrong once I realise I’ve made a mistake. So, this goes for all the people following my blog: if any of the posts I shared are about ‘imaginary’ issues (just… wow at the use of this word) or contain false information, please feel free to let me know and I will take it under advisement. I’m always willing to learn.