At Townhall, Brent Bozell writes an article about news coverage (actually the lack thereof) of the March for Life.
His point is the unbalanced reporting on protests in America by the major news outlets. He says:
But it's much more than that. The "news" media are militantly pro-abortion and are not about to give oxygen to the pro-life cause even when it is undeniably newsworthy.
If you're throwing Molotov cocktails at police officers or burning down pizza parlors in furtherance of a cause endorsed by the press, reporters will provide comprehensive and sympathetic coverage. Think Ferguson. If you're peacefully standing up for the most vulnerable in our society, you get nothing.
Bozell contrasts the reporting at major news outlets (NBC, Washington Post, CBS, Reuters, and the Associated Press) for protests involving a few to a few dozen protesters, with the lack of reporting for the March for Life 2015, which involved an estimated half million in DC.
You should read the entire article.
Today, the Church remembers St Agnes, virgin and martyr.
There is a church named for her agony at Piazza Navona, in Rome Italy. I visited it during my pilgrimage to Rome in Sept 2013:
"Rome, the final day."
Here's a photo from Piazza Navona which shows the church in the background.
I noted in my paragraph about the church of St Agnes in Agony, there is a side altar dedicated to St Sebastian, whose martyrdom the Church remembered yesterday.
In a recent article, Fr Robert Barron writes concerning The Decline of Philosophy.
He writes:
Since I have developed these arguments many times before in other forums, let me say just a few things in regard to the scientists. I have found that, in practically every instance, the scientists who declare their disbelief in God have no idea what serious religious people mean by the word "God." Almost without exception, they think of God as some supreme worldly nature, an item within the universe for which they have found no "evidence," a gap within the ordinary nexus of causal relations, etc. I would deny such a reality as vigorously as they do. If that's what they mean by "God," then I'm as much an atheist as they -- and so was Thomas Aquinas. What reflective religious people mean when they speak of God is not something within the universe, but rather the condition for the possibility of the universe as such, the non-contingent ground of contingency. And about that reality, the sciences, strictly speaking, have nothing to say one way or another, for the consideration of such a state of affairs is beyond the limits of the scientific method. And so when statistics concerning the lack of belief among scientists are trotted out, my response, honestly, is "who cares?"
I enjoyed this article very much and encourage you to read it in its' entirety.
