Yesterday, on the above linked site the following blog posting appeared without comment by Mr. Rockwell and was entitled: No War Toys for Christmas
Father Emmanuel Charles McCarthy suggests that if your parish collects toys for Christmas gifts, you might ask your pastor to note that war toys are not wanted. "It could be explained in the bulletin why toys that fill children with the spirits of homicide and enmity and self righteousness do not fit into the meaning and purpose of Christmas."
Is it truly toys and not moral teachings that influence our young? I have no knowledge of the identity of Father McCarthy nor of the sect or diocese he represents, but responded to the posting as follows:
Re: No war toys for Christmas
What is a "war toy"? I would submit that such items are merely non functioning children's versions of tools that are used for military purposes. McCarthy's implication is that all military purposes are evil and must be discouraged. This is the logic of those who would disarm law abiding citizens thus preventing them from engaging in self defense.
Would Father McCarthy decline toy guns used by defenders of the constitution or toy cannon such as used in our revolutionary war?
Objecting to and imputing morality to mere tools borders on idiocy. Are toy guillotines also to be banned? Ultimately it is human intent which should be the subject of moral condemnation. Was it Jesus in Luke 22:36 who stated: "Let him without a sword sell his cloak to buy one"?
As of the time of this posting, Mr Rockwell has neither responded to nor posted my comment on the blog. Having said that and in the spirit of a lively libertarian discussion I am pleased to report that one of the contributers to Mr. Rockwell's site with which this writer almost totally agrees is Dr. Walter Block; closely followed by Drs. Thomas DiLorenzo and Thomas Woods.
Tangentially apropos the subject, one of the practices disturbing to this writer is the recent characterization by the mass media of all military personnel especially those wounded or killed in the current conflicts as "heroes". Having served previously in the military wherein extraordinary heroic actions were a requisite for that designation, it seems to me a disservice to genuine heroes to assign the title to those who's only misfortune though tragic, is to have suffered the consequences of warfare.
In any event, to quote an ancient philosopher: "Only the dead have seen the end of war". For now I, for one would council keeping one's powder dry and compiling a list of candidates for the future decoration of lamp posts á-la signore Mussolini.