ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS
George Orwell: Animal Farm 1945
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.
One of the first arguments that generally come out of the mouth of a person who supports abortion when confronted by the argument on innocent life is that you aren’t killing baby in abortion.
Not anymore. Mary Elizabeth Williams has decided to go the other way here is the title or her Salon Piece
This was the exact thought process that led me to the exact opposite position. I, too, noticed a distinction between how women approached an in-utero child when they wanted the child and how they felt about it when the pregnancy was unexpected and unwanted. Logically, it made no sense to me that the mother’s disposition should change the biological disposition of the baby. Therefore, it made no sense that it should change the ethics of the situation. But Mary Elizabeth Williams goes a whole different direction
Mary Elizabeth Williams doesn’t just go in a different direction she goes all Comrade Napoleon on us
All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss
By this same logic, isn’t infanticide also fine and dandy? After all, if we’re talking about autonomy, kids aren’t exactly independent as soon as they are born. No infant can take care of themselves. And even later on in childhood, children rely heavily on the adults in their life to provide shelter, food, and emotional support. What about kids and adults who become disabled in life? What about quadriplegics?
When terrorists flew jets into tall buildings, they believed that those 3,000 lives were “worth sacrificing” for the furtherance of their situation. When Nazis led people with disabilities into gas chambers, those lives were “worth sacrificing” for society. When Herod had all the male children killed Bethlehem, those lives were “worth sacrificing” for his ease of mind.
The utilitarian mindset is a crystalline brutality of efficiency. If human beings of unknown or dubious worth cannot contribute to the comfort of a society, or the success of an endeavor or the happiness of one’s life, they are swept aside and away.
I’m shocked none of these ladies mentioned slavery, the ultimate utilitarian argument, consider these words from Williams…
She understands that it saves lives not just in the most medically literal way, but in the roads that women who have choice then get to go down, in the possibilities for them and for their families.
..and remember the arguments in the past concerning the black man, and the red man and how their subordination allowed the superior the more important to advance and achieve, to give them roads to go down and possibilities for them and their families.
A recent study published by Great Britain’s Royal College of Psychiatrists (H/T Alveda King Blog) includes data collected from 22 studies, conducted over 14 years, involving over 887,000 women, of which at least 166,831 had abortions. The results? Eighty-one percent of women (81%) who have had abortions suffer an increased risk of severe mental health problems.
All these reactions have merit but they miss the real story of the Salon piece although Elizabeth comes closest…
Were I a cartographer, I would hasten to warn Ms. Williams against this route; I would mark the map, “Here be Monsters.”
Elizabeth Elizabeth Elizabeth you are so close, being kind-hearted you conclude that Ms Williams is taking herself on a monstrous route unknowingly, but observe her argument carefully. This is a place she has been forever, in fact an honest reading of her piece admits the pro-abortion side has been there all along. The only reason she is making this statement in public is she believes it will advance her cause.
In short Ms. Williams is not taking the route toward the monsters, she is the MONSTER and the monster has decided it is strong enough to show true colors. By it being printed in a national magazine publicly it informs others that they can openly discuss this topic without fear.
That begs the question why now? Well that’s a piece is for tomorrow.
The 4th Doctor :“You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.”
Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Episode Four
Stan:I want you all to call me “Loretta”
Monty Python’s Life of Brian 1979
In the course of my reading yesterday I came across this piece at The Other McCain concerning the ongoing war between Radical feminists and Transgender activists.
I wish Brennan and her radical feminist allies could be strategic enough to realize that there is a huge majority of people who would be willing to support them on this one point — that “woman” is a biological category, not a “gender identity” — if only they realized how important this issue is. The fact that the people being targeted now are my ideological antagonists is not irrelevant to my concern. If hardcore feminists can be targeted this way, what do you think is going to happen when the Tranny Totalitarians target conservatives?
While I find the fight between this em “interesting” groups of people quite amusing there was a rather clarifying moment within this post. This was a tweet from a “transgender” person by the name of Sophia Banks and a response by a person who goes under “SugarPuss” that neatly encapsulates the actual reality here:
Now before we comment on this tweet there is one thing that needs to be clarified. There is, in fact, a tiny amount of people who are born with the sexual organs of both sexes and or an abnormal production of hormones. If a person is in such a situation one should respect whatever decision said person makes at the age of decision in terms of choosing to define oneself as either (or no) sex. None of what follows applies to a person with said medical condition.
Now back to that tweets, The bottom line is with the exception I just noted above there is a simple fact that can not be disputed:
Women do not have penises.
Or as Nursie once explained in Black Adder Series 2
Women do not have penises, Women have never had penises and baring an incredible advance in genetic modification and manipulation or transplant surgery women never will have penises any more than men will have wombs.
Now there are a statistically insignificant amount of men and women who have for whatever reason chosen to have their bodies physically altered, via surgery and or hormone treatments to resemble the opposite sex and who have chosen to live as such. The recognized term used for such a person is “Transgender”. In some countries such alteration is recognized by law, however this doesn’t change the actual reality any more than laws claiming a woman’s testimony is worth half of a man’s under sharia describes an actual mathematical ratio of eyewitness validity.
Now if that tweet said “Transgender woman” rather than simply “woman” I would have no problem with it as it acknowledges the objective reality of a person choosing to physically or chemically altering themselves in a way recognized by law. Nor do I have a problem with a person such as Sophia Banks choosing to live as a woman, function as a woman etc etc etc. Whatever my opinion of the wisdom or sanity of such a decision it’s not my life and therefore not my business. Nor would I have a problem is a person meeting “Sophia” chooses to use female pronouns in discussion, particularly if they had no acquaintance with Sophia before the alternation. Two of the three “transgender” people I know I only met after their “transformation” therefore I find it convenient to use feminine pronouns particularly if they do not wish their previous status disclosed.
However a line is crossed from amused disinterest line to outright defiance if any attempt is made to compel me to acknowledge this delusion as “fact” or if one wishes to force such an acknowledgement by law. At that point this goes from a delusion that only harms the deluded to an attempt to impose a blatant falsehood as truth which is wrong. A great parallel to this would be the group of “catholic” women who ordain themselves & others as catholic “priests”. It’s one thing for them to live this delusion, it’s quite another if they demand the actual Catholic Church to recognize the validity of their make-believe orders.
Or think of the character of Teddy Brewster in the Movie Arsenic & Old Lace.
As long as Teddy is simply blowing his bugle and just talking to neighbors his delusion is not a problem or at most a minor annoyance, but the moment he demands secret service protection as an Ex President and insists on attending international conferences being acknowledged as Theodore Roosevelt and takes legal action to secure and compel it, then one would be compelled to remind him of objective reality.
And that brings us to this tweet I put out in response to Stacy’s post that caused so much fuss yesterday.
Not our biz if @sophiaphotos wants to take hormones to play Gidget. That chances if he wants to compel us to play by law @rsmccain#tcot#p2 — Peter Ingemi (@DaTechGuyblog) July 23, 2014
(note typo in tweet should have said “changes” rather than “chances”)
I’ve tweeted a lot over the years and I’ve never seen more uproar and quicker response from any tweet I’ve ever sent out and believe me I’ve sent out some provocative tweets in my time.
The responses I got varied from the simple vulgar expletive:
@DaTechGuyblog Uh huh, ask me the same question I asked you, clever. I’m literally just calling you out on your transphobia. — MicJPM (@Mic_jpm) July 23, 2014
to those suggesting I should be removed from the radio:
— #AnyoneBUTFord2014 (@itsgottobegood) July 23, 2014
I found it all quite amusing and returned tweets for a bit until actual “life” trumped my amusement but as of this writing angry responses continue to enter my timeline. I’m not inclined to block them because I’m a first amendment guy & I generally don’t block an account unless it’s a phony troll one. Contrary to their totalitarian impulses crazy uncles/aunts have the right to their opinion just as I have and I further am confident in the wisdom of my followers.
While flogging this reaction might be good for traffic & DaTipJar there is a more interesting phenom to note in term of both psychology & the net that I’d like to discuss.
Five years ago (have I really been doing this that long?) I wrote a piece called “The Empowerment of Crazy Uncles” where I talked about how the internet empowers the 1% of people who are, shall we say reality challenged.
The problem is with the internet and social networking and the like that crazy 1% or 1/10 of one percent is suddenly empowered. Instead of the crazy uncle at the family gathering that you can ignore, suddenly he has 1000 friends that he can text to rebut and counter rebut all night. He is affirmed and empowered and boy is he motivated, because now there are thousands of people telling him he’s been right all along and is MUCH smarter than everyone thought.
300,000-3,000,000 crazy uncles as individuals isn’t a big deal, but get them all writing e-mails or making phone calls and most importantly AFFIRMING themselves and suddenly you have a potent economic and or political force. Suddenly there is a huge market for a book or 10,000 people willing to pay $20 for a DVD. That’s a fair amount of change and a person can make a good living off of it.
While the net empowers these crazy uncles there is one limiting effect upon them. While they make up a considerable niche market and an excellent activist base in reality they are a rounding error when compared to the actual population. That means if you have constructed your psychological identity based entirely on an illusion and have spent thousands of dollars and years of your time reinforcing said illusion via surgical & chemical alteration the one thing you dread above all else is the person who, without fear, is willing to deny your illusion , to pull back the curtain of the Wizard, or point to the procession and say “but the Emperor has nothing on!”
And if such a person is in any way a public person that might encourage others to do the same the carefully built lie that is one’s life becomes as fragile as a block of flats put up by hypnosis:
You want to talk phobia THAT’s phobia.
But it’s not just those deluded and fearful of reality who are endangered, it’s the people who make their living supporting and enabling such delusions. The expensive treatments, the bestselling books, the political machines who can count on shock troops, the ability to exploit these people financially & politically for their own gain is never more in danger than when people are willing to stand up and bluntly say the truth. And the truth is this:
When your identity & belief system in your life can be summed up neatly in a 3 minute gag from a Monty Python movie.
Then it’s likely a wise move to re-examine that system closely.
It’s one thing to lose a cherished delusion, it’s quite another to lose the gravy train that those people illusions finance. That demands a loud, immediate and even a totalitarian response. That’s the real fear on display for the world to see here, if they did not have this fear they would have ignored me as just some guy on twitter to block.
Two things in closing: None of this nonsense removes the inherent dignity owed a person by virtue of humanity. Furthermore said person remains a child of God and thus the proper subject for prayer as required. Those are the rules.
If one’s goal is to intimidate and silence that last thing you want to see is this:
The amusing & irrational tweets from those outraged by my homage to reality will be the subject of my lead post tomorow. @rsmccain#tcot#p2 — Peter Ingemi (@DaTechGuyblog) July 24, 2014
God has given Commandments unto Men. From these Commandments Men have framed Laws by which to be governed. It is honorable and praiseworthy to faithfully serve the people by helping to administer these Laws. If the Laws are not enforced, the People are not well governed.
Yesterday I paid my first ever visit to MIT’s rather odd-shaped chapel
to cover and participate in the Eucharistic adoration in response against the Harvard Black Mass
People slowly started showing up slowly. Joe spoke to me
I noticed some local (to me) folk who protest regularly at the Fitchburg Planned Parenthood. When they arrived, shortly before reporters from the Globe. They would leave for a moment with plans to come back & sit down later.
That would prove to be a bad move as the people started coming in waves
We had gotten word from the Crimson (ht Lisa Graas) that the Black Mass was being moved to a restaurant off campus called the Middle East.
However even before the Eucharist procession began the word came that they had no intention of hosting the event.
as the MIT crowd continued to grow I moved my setup out of the chapel proper to a table in the corridor but soon there was no room to be there so I moved it to the back wall by the door on a trash receptacle, but a few minutes later there was no room there either. I sent out twitter updates as space allowed
By the time the Adoration actually began there was no room in the building and two batches of lines extending outside of the building extended from the chapel doors on both sides of it
it is no accident that this turned the odd oblong shape of the building if viewed from above into the shape of the cross.
After the prayers the procession began the sacrament under the canopy. I was on the opposite side of the building and ran around the chapel, set up my camera after the front passed and simply recorded the people, it took nearly five minutes for all the people involved to pass.
I talked to both the MIT police and while both knew there was supposed to be a procession neither anticipated the sheer volume of people. Cambridge police rushed ahead to close down streets to allow the procession to pass.
You could not see the front of the procession from the back
As we passed and the folks at the end were constantly being stopped and asked what was happening. People were waving from apartments or staring from shop windows.
When we passed the Middle east there was a distinctly noticeable group gathered at the entrance staring at us taking photos.
Eventually after our long walk we reached St. Pauls. The sun had already set and the crowd overwhelmed the area.
and it soon became apparent that there was simply no room to get everybody in the building.
At this time word had gone around that the club not having found a place to celebrate the black mass had cancelled it.
The overflow filled the area outside of the church proper and was all over the steps and the area across the street, at this point I caught a break, reporters & cameramen looking for a shot were ushered to a side door in the choir loft in front of the pipe organ.
it looked even more packed from the inside than it did from outside.
I shed my coat and laptop bag as we were sweltering in the heat and set up my camera just as Fr. Drea began his sermon
I was very tired and hot, and even with the monopod it was hard to keep he camera steady particularly as I tried to take still shots with a 2nd camera at the same time.
His Homily was very gracious, particularly to the Harvard president sitting in the front row.
after the homily I took a pan of the crowd as a choir located to the right of the altar sang
And took a few shots
after a period of reverence and prayer
The blessed sacrament was moved removed from the altar. I stayed to sing the first hymn but as a second hymn was being sung I made my way outside where I set up to video people leaving.
I ran into two very Irish sounding ladies from Plymouth who declined to be interviewed on camera who had been at the location where the Catholic League was saying their Rosary of reparation at the original planned location of the Black Mass They told me that groups of Satanists cursed them & shouted at them but was unable to phase them.
At this point the altar servers & choir started to process out
followed by the people.
I hand counted 1200 people inside from my upper perch I’m estimating 1500-1600 people overall not counting those doing the Rosary of Reparation. I congratulated the chaplain from MIT who had organized the procession, he wanted to do something proactive and had succeeded. I then spotted the auxiliary bishop of Boston who I met at the DC airport the day Francis was elected, he agreed to an interview.
Former Boston Mayor & US Ambassador to the Holy See Ray Flynn greeted him.
and then gave me an interview
I spoke to local police there, they said the crowd of believers had been very polite and were really taken by the thanks offered by the crowd, it was an unusual but pleasant experience for them.
They informed me during the service there was a single protester who was shouting at the ceremony from outside to no effect. As the crowd started to disperse he returned and continued to shout at the crowd calling them cannibals and decrying the church and the people there.
I can understand his anger, not only was the black mass not on campus but any black mass that was to be held (later reports say it was held at a Chinese restaurant in town it was not sponsored by any Harvard Club. The importance against the mass of the faithful must have been a great frustration.
I said a loud prayer for him in response and then caught a ride with Mary Ann Harold who had arrived at St. Paul first and wondered if there would be much of crowd but not long afterwards the mass of faithful catholics answered that question for her.
A postscript: As we drove to my car at Alewife Station she related that as she sat down in the then empty church she saw an apparition of the head of Satan appear over and to the left of the altar over the church. The head was disfigured and was screaming in pain and anger.
Given the results of the night, that was completely understandable.
Update: Apparently that planned Black Mass has backfired even worsethat I thought
Merrimack, N.H.,
Thomas More College is holding three days of penance and prayer, from May 12 to 14, in response to the black mass.
In Denver
Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, a parish of the Archdiocese of Denver located in Littleton, Colo., will hold a Mass of Reparation said at 5:30 p.m. The Mass will be said by Fr. Joseph Hearty, FSSP, and will be followed by a rosary and Benediction.
In Texas Illinois & Pennsylvania
In Alice, Texas, outside of Corpus Christi, Our Lady of Guadalupe parish will hold a Holy Hour at 6 p.m. In the Diocese of Orange, Blessed Sacrament in Westminster will hold a Holy Hour of reparation. Holy hours will also be held at Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish in Bath, Pa., and at St. Mary’s in Alton, outside of Springfield, Ill.
on Facebook
A Facebook group organized in response to the event at Harvard has garnered more than 2,200 members who have pledged to go to Adoration on May 12 in reparation.
and Around the world
Catholics from around the world, including the Philippines, have also pledged to pray in reparation for the black mass. The monks of Norcia at the Monastery of San Benedetto, Italy, announced a Chaplet of Divine Mercy in reparation as well.
So: No Black Mass on Harvard Campus, No Official Harvard group involved in a Black Mass and massive amounts of b No Black Mass sponsored by a Harvard Group, Massive amounts of prayer.
and against that a private party at the Chinese Restaurant.
And all of this came because Catholics didn’t meekly accept Harvard’s plans.
Update 2: One video out of place, fixed plus via Father Z & flicker some photos from the front.
Since the spiritual battle between good and evil has never been more visible, Saint Michael, Captain of the Angelic Hosts, was invoked repeatedly over the bullhorn. As we prayed, a group of individuals dressed mostly in black with satanic insignia gathered in little groups to jeer and mock the prayers. One even muttered “Hail Satan!” as he passed by the statue of Our Lady of Fatima. But this did not in the least deter those on the sidewalk who continued praying the Rosary at the intersection of Cambridge and Kirkland streets until 8:35 PM.
Apparently they bore the burnt of the Satanist ire while the rest of us were processing and praying with the blessed sacrament
To conclude the protest, Saint Louis de Montfort’s Consecration to Mary was recited. This last prayer seemed to especially unnerve the satanists nearby. Two of them came up and aggressively yelled insults against Christianity in our faces. Then others, also dressed in black, were overheard saying, “smash the statue,” referring to the beautiful replica of the International Pilgrim Virgin Statue of Our Lady of Fatima that wept repeatedly in New Orleans in July 1972. Their hatred was explicitly directed against Our Lady. With this, TFP volunteers formed a protective perimeter around Our Lady, escorting her safely to the van, while being trailed by those who wished to smash her.
I see the TFP people regularly at CPAC they are fearless warriors for the faith, while fewer in number than the procession by far they did some heavy lifting for us and should be commended for it.
************************************************
This blog exists as a full-time endeavor thanks to your support. The only check I draw to pay for this coverage and all that is done is what you choose to provide.
For a full month I ask a fixed amount $1465, as of today May 13 we have $315 in the till. We need $65 a day every day for the rest of the month to make that goal.
If you think this coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting Datipjar below.
Naturally once our monthly goal is made these solicitations will disappear till the next month but once we get 61 more subscribers at $20 a month the goal will be covered for a full year and this pitch will disappear until 2015.
Harvard is now up to its 3rd revision of its “official response” to the Harvard Black Mass scheduled for tonight. As this statement doesn’t acknowledge the previous statements or that anything has been revised, rather than just posting it I’m going to fisk it. My comments in Red italic
****************************************
The following statement was issued by Robert Neugeboren, dean of students and alumni affairs at Harvard Extension School:
The first major change is the inclusion of an actual named person rather than something just unsigned. Apparently it is better for one man to take the heat than the entire university.
Students at the Harvard Extension School, like students at colleges across the nation, organize and operate a number of independent student organizations, representing a wide range of student interests. The Harvard Extension School does not endorse the views or activities of any independent student organization. But we do support the rights of our students and faculty to speak and assemble freely.
This is pretty much the original first two paragraphs slightly rearranged and it sounds just as weaisly. Not only do you have the vanilla 1st amendment defense but note how Harvard suddenly becomes just like “colleges across the nation” rather that THE elite university of the United States
In this case, we understand that this independent student organization, the Harvard Extension Cultural Studies Club, is hosting a series of events—including the reenactment of a “Black Mass”—as part of a student-led effort to explore different cultures.
Yea the Black Mass is just one of MANY student events. but gone are the comparisons to the Shinto Tea Ceremonies, Shaker events and Buddhist Meditation. The sudden need to no longer mention these events in the same breath as the Black Mass illustrates that the Black Mass is not just another cultural event
We do not agree with the student group’s decision to stage an event that is so deeply disturbing and offensive to many in the Harvard community and beyond.
Translation: After a weekend of national coverage that has not been favorable having no opinion o this event is no longer tenable, and note the use of the word “we” who is “we”? Is it we the university, we the exchange club, we the people fielding the phone calls from all over the nation?
While we support the ability of all our students to explore difficult issues, we also encourage them to do so in ways that are sensitive to others.
If you are going to mock Roman Catholic belief, you need to do it in a sensitive way.
To that end, the Harvard Extension School has worked with the club’s student leaders to address specific concerns that have been expressed. For instance, we have ensured that no consecrated host will be used as part of the reenactment.
How have you “ensured this?” What steps have you taken? Does that not suggest that Harvard is participating in the event in a supervisory manner as the Romans did at the crucifixion?
Also, in an effort to help broaden the educational nature of this series, the Harvard Extension School has urged the Cultural Studies Club’s student leaders to reach out to Catholic student organizations on campus to foster a positive dialogue about the Catholic faith. The club’s student leaders have agreed to this proposal.
If the cultural club was holding a minstrel show in blackface as an “educational” event, would having the club “reach out” to campus Black organizations without cancelling the event be an acceptable choice?
We hope these efforts and this dialogue will help address some of the most severe concerns about the event,
We hope that you crazy Christians stop calling and e-mailing us and about this event, we said we didn’t’ like it ….we said we don’t like it, isn’t that enough
while also helping students in the Cultural Studies Club better understand the perspective of many Catholics on these and other issues.
You guys better not put us on the spot like this again, especially if it risks donor dollars are put at risk.
Questions about the event should be directed to the Cultural Studies Club at culturalstudiesclub@gmail.com.
This is the ultimate Pontius Pilate moment, no longer is the contact jeff_neal@harvard.edu if you want to send complaints send it to that e-mail account we at Harvard wash our hands of the whole thing.
*********************************************
This statement is another exercise in sophistry. They “do not agree” and say the club should be “sensitive” but are not willing to call the event “wrong” or “insensitive”. They claim they are making sure the that a consecrated host is not being used while trying to distance themselves from an event being held on the Harvard Campus by a club bearing Harvard’s name as if they have no power to do anything about it. Finally they not only redirect complaints from the adults at the university who are supposed to be in charge but to a gmail account that one might not even associate with the university.
This is what THE elite university in the nation is reduced to.
Why any person who professes belief in Christ would pay money to send their child to be educated by these people is beyond me.
The reenactment of a ‘black mass’ planned by a student group affiliated with the Harvard Extension School challenges us to reconcile the dedication to free expression at the heart of a university with our commitment to foster a community based on civility and mutual understanding.
No it doesn’t, it questions if Harvard will allow a club that bears its name to hold the Black Mass on their property.
Vigorous and open discussion and debate are essential to the pursuit of knowledge, and we must uphold these values even in the face of controversy. Freedom of expression, as Justice Holmes famously said long ago, protects not only free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.
This isn’t a debate, this isn’t a protest, this is an event being held on Harvard’s property sponsored by a Harvard club. If it was just about education the club could have gone off campus and visited The Satanic Temple’s location and observed the Black Mass there. Nor is it a question of thought, nobody is complaining about Harvard’s thoughts, they are talking about Harvard’s actions.
But even as we permit expression of the widest range of ideas, we must also take responsibility for debating and challenging expression with which we profoundly disagree.
Again this isn’t a “debate about ideas”.or engaging in protest against the church and it’s beliefs. It is a specific ceremony, a proactive action against Christians in general & Catholics in particular.
The ‘black mass’ had its historical origins as a means of denigrating the Catholic Church; it mocks a deeply sacred event in Catholicism, and is highly offensive to many in the Church and beyond. The decision by a student club to sponsor an enactment of this ritual is abhorrent; it represents a fundamental affront to the values of inclusion, belonging and mutual respect that must define our community.
This is the best part of the statement, gone is the “disagree” from above replaced by actual words of condemnation.
It is deeply regrettable that the organizers of this event, well aware of the offense they are causing so many others, have chosen to proceed with a form of expression that is so flagrantly disrespectful and inflammatory.
Not as regrettable as Harvard choosing to allow this event by a Harvard club to be held on campus.
Nevertheless, consistent with the University’s commitment to free expression, including expression that may deeply offend us, the decision to proceed is and will remain theirs.
I am innocent of this man’s blood…
At the same time, we will vigorously protect the right of others to respond—and to address offensive expression with expression of their own.
The suggestion that we who intended to respond to this event needed our right to do so to be protected by Harvard is both laughable & disingenuous.
I plan to attend a Eucharistic Holy Hour and Benediction at St. Paul’s Church on our campus on Monday evening in order to join others in reaffirming our respect for the Catholic faith at Harvard
You and everyone else who comes would be most welcome, but a better demonstration of that respect would be using your power to not allow the Black Mass on campus
and to demonstrate that the most powerful response to offensive speech is not censorship, but reasoned discourse and robust dissent.
Let me conclude by saying this is by far the best statement from Harvard. It comes from the president on the main Harvard site and it, unlike previous statements explicitly acknowledges what the Black Mass is, what it is intended to do and why it is wrong. Compared to Harvard’s previous response it is a great improvement.
However that statement, in all its glory is sophistry, it draws a false equivalency to excuse inaction.
The president is correct that as a rule, the best answer to offensive speech is more speech. People do not have the right to not be offended and the best way to deal with that kind of speech is to produce speech of your own.
However this is not speech being made by a group of people in the public square, or online or a debate show. Nor is this a protest being held against the church, its beliefs or positions. If it was it would be protected speech and no matter how offensive such speech might be it must be allowed under the First Amendment and the principles of academic freedom.
This is instead a specific event with a specific meaning being held by a club that bears Harvard’s name at a venue on the Harvard Campus that Harvard’s President has decided to allow.
Furthermore the propose of this statement all about mitigating the outrage that this event is producing while providing Ms. Faust cover to refrain from using the power & authority entrusted to her.
It’s not a statement it’s an excuse and frankly unworthy of the president of the most prominent university in the United States .
President Faust’s presence at the Holy Hour not withstanding if the Black Mass takes place on campus it should end with Ms. Faust’s resignation.
Well, if Faust finds it “abhorrent” and a “fundamental affront,” why not force its cancellation? The ceremony — excuse me, performance art — will take place in a pub on university grounds, and the club is affiliated with the university. Harvard claims it can’t do anything about it on the grounds of intellectual freedom, but local priests scoff at that notion, especially given the intentionally sacrilegious nature of the black mass. One priest wondered whether Harvard would allow a re-enactment of a KKK ceremony as educational
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 
