My email is not working very well

My email is not working very well November 14, 2012

Consequently, I cannot reply easily to folks who are complaining about a thread that has spun out of control down below, fractaling off into discussions about rape and women’s suffrage and whatnot. In addition, I cannot net.nanny the blog because I’m on the road and running around and have barely had time to look in and see if people are playing well with others. One of my correspondents is a rape victim (and I know I have other readers in the same situation) who, not too surprisingly, say that comments like Todd Akin’s “legitimate rape” remark and those defending him are extremely painful to those who have experienced rape. I agree. Let’s remember that such conversations are always being conducted in the homes and offices of people for whom the memory of their own rape is as near as closing their eyes and remembering. Therefore, that conversation will go to private email and will stop now. Thank you.

I further would like to add that I would just as soon the whole discussion of women’s suffrage go to Zippy’s blog . I have no particular problem with enfranchising all adults in having a say in how they shall be governed (here GKC and I differ) and don’t buy the notion that enfranchisement of women necessarily means an abortion license. There are plenty of women who oppose abortion and plenty of men who support it (it’s been a huge boon for irresponsible men). Here in the US, the prolife movement has made steady progress at the cultural level because anybody can see the justice of it. I daresay nobody (including me) can see the justice of denying women a say in how they shall be governed as a way to stop abortion. Those who want to make that case should please take it to Zippy’s site. I think the world of Zippy and regard him as one of most honest, decent, good and fearless proponents of the Faith I’ve met in cyberspace. His calm, clear-eyed refusal to be bamboozled by the Right’s prostitution to torture enthusiasm is a model of how a Catholic should think with the Church and not with the Tribe. But I disagree with him here on this entirely prudential matter which has, as far as I can see, no connection at all to the Church’s teaching, though I’m honored to call him a friend.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • TheRealAaron

    Since Mark may be too busy to correct it: Zippy’s blog address has changed. The old one is a spam site now.

  • But I disagree with him here on this entirely prudential matter which has, as far as I can see, no connection at all to the Church’s teaching, though I’m honored to call him a friend.

    I absolutely agree that there is no connection to Church teaching here, FWIW, and am happy to discuss the subject(s) at my place with anyone interested. Pax, brother, and have a good trip.

  • Will

    “Discussions like this one provide convincing evidence that female suffrage was, in fact, a grave mistake; a mistake which has cost literally millions of innocent dead.”

    I would hope that the above comment (from the thread mentioned above) violates the Church’s teaching.

  • Rebecca

    I won’t contribute to That Thread anymore in an attempt to honor our host’s request, but I wanted to let Zippy know that I went to his blog site and read his brief post on women’s suffrage and abortion. I now understand the point he was trying to make in the other thread (well, sort of) and see that his comments about suffrage weren’t intended as a putdown to the women participating in the thread. Some background is often helpful in these discussions.

  • Misty

    I will admit that upon perusing through Zippy’s blog I am very disappointed at what I read. I enjoy your blog Mark, but the association with Zippy has made me question a few things, especially the notion that he is defining himself first and foremost as a Catholic and then tailspinning into revoking universal suffrage, the submission of women to men, that in a perfect balance women take care of the home, and the list goes on in his blog. The use of the word “slutty”. It is so dismissive it is nauseating. I don’t know if anyone else is aware but there is a whole bunch of young, married Catholics, both parents working, with great kids that are actually equal. We are faithful and faithfilled and trying to reset the clock to a time when people like Zippy can grasp onto a deflating life raft of pseudo-chivalry is hurting us, the ones raising the next generation. We do what we have to do for God and our families. If my husband is the nurturer and I have the God given brains to make more money, back off and let us flourish. Better yet, support us.

    • To be perfectly clear:

      Mark is a good friend.

      We disagree about quite a few things, and you do him a disservice by playing some sort of guilt by association card.

      None of that implies that I don’t mean exactly what I say when I say it, of course.

      And my “About” page tells you precisely how I present myself:

      “Zippy” is me. ”Zippy Catholic” is the blog.

      I’m just some clown who happens to be Roman Catholic. “Zippy” started as a throwaway nickname that is mostly Mark Shea‘s fault; but now I’m stuck with it, and the name and I have grown attached over the years. ”Catholic” because when I went to start a blog “Zippy” by itself wasn’t available, and because I aspire to be Catholic in my thinking and practice. It most certainly doesn’t imply that I am a particularly good Catholic or speak for the Church. All ideas and opinions (other than direct quotations) are my own, and if you accept the thoughts and assertions of an Internet clown named Zippy without doing your own due diligence you are probably even sillier than an Internet clown named Zippy.

      • Will

        I understood Mark’s statement to be that there was no Church teaching involved so the discussion was being “moved” to your blog. I think there is plenty of Church teaching involved about equality of men and women, etc.

        • Come on over to my place and cite the Church teaching you think applies.

          • Will
            • That document does not contain the word “vote” or “suffrage”. But since Mark has asked for that discussion to be taken to my place, I’ll just leave you with this quote from the papal encyclical Immortale Dei, after which you may have the last word here (my comboxes remain open):

              23. But that harmful and deplorable passion for innovation which was aroused in the sixteenth century threw first of all into confusion the Christian religion, and next, by natural sequence, invaded the precincts of philosophy, whence it spread amongst all classes of society. From this source, as from a fountain-head, burst forth all those later tenets of unbridled license which, in the midst of the terrible unheavals of the last century, were wildly conceived and boldly proclaimed as the principles and foundation of that new conception of law which was not merely previously unknown, but was at variance on many points with not only the Christian, but even the natural law.

              24. Amongst these principles the main one lays down that as all men are alike by race and nature, so in like manner all are equal in the control of their life; that each one is so far his own master as to be in no sense under the rule of any other individual; that each is free to think on every subject just as he may choose, and to do whatever he may like to do; that no man has any right to rule over other men. In a society grounded upon such maxims all government is nothing more nor less than the will of the people, and the people, being under the power of itself alone, is alone its own ruler. It does choose, nevertheless, some to whose charge it may commit itself, but in such wise that it makes over to them not the right so much as the business of governing, to be exercised, however, in its name.

        • Mark Shea

          The issue is voting, not equality. Can you please take it off my blog?

    • Ted Seeber

      Misty, I invite you to consider the potential idea that the opposite is also true- that the flood of abuse of freedom with respect to only destroying the gender role of females but not of males has resulted in a huge amount of broken households and wounded people. And wounded people, have a tendency to wound others.

  • Norris

    Did you receive my email last Saturday?

    • Mark Shea

      Yes. It’s just hard to reply, so my mail is piling up.

  • Marty Helgesen

    When I heard and read Todd Akin’s remark I assumed that by “legitmate rape” he was referring to forcible rape as distinct from statutory rape. In other words he was not saying that the action itself was legitiamte but that the word “rape” can legitmately be applied that that action. In some cases, probably many but I don’t know, the underage girl consents to and even welcomes the intercourse.
    I don’t know why Akin and his advisors were too obtuse to clarify his meaning.

  • J. H. M. Ortiz

    Women’s suffrage “has … no connection at all to the Church’s teaching”?
    Well, granted that the Magisterium has issued no definition de fide, it does propose for our at-least qualified and provisional assent that it’s “in full conformity with human nature that there should be juridico-political structures providing all citizens in an ever better fashion and without any discrimination the practical possibility of freely and actively taking part in the establishment of the juridical foundations of the political community and in the direction of public affairs, in fixing the terms of reference of the various public bodies and in the election of political leaders. All citizens [“omnes cives”], therefore, should be mindful of the right and also the duty to use their free vote to further the common good.” — Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes, in the first paragraph of section 75.
    One could retort, of course, that my argument “proves too much”, as the saying goes: taking “all citizens” literally without any restriction, it would imply that the Council is asserting the absurdity that even an American pre-schooler has the right to vote in an American election. My response would be that the common-sense context (the “universe of discourse”) obviously involves common-sense exceptions: children, persons certified demented, etc. But can such “exceptions” reasonably extend to all adult American women at large? If so, why?