Supreme Supreme

"Kavanaugh would be less receptive to abortion and gay rights than Kennedy was."

- The Associated Press

This literally has nothing to do with the function of the supreme court.  The court is not a legislative body.  Justices aren't supposed to discover rights in the constitution that aren't explicitly enumerated there.

"Not all possess the radical readiness to change"

Now this radical readiness to change, the necessary condition for a transformation in Christ, is not actually possessed by all Catholic believers.  It is, rather, a distinctive trait of those who have grasped the full import of the Call, and without reserve have decided upon an imitation of Christ.  

There are many religious Catholics whose readiness to change is merely a conditional one.  They exert themselves to keep the commandments and to get rid of such qualities as they have recognized as sinful.  But they lack the will and the readiness to become new men all in all, to break with all purely natural standards, to view all things in a supernatural light.  They prefer to evade the act of metanoia: a true conversion of the heart.  Hence with undisturbed consciences they cling to all that appears to them legitimate by natural standards.

Their conscience permits them to remain entrenched in their self-assertion.  For example, they do not feel the obligation of loving their enemies; they let their pride have its way within certain limits; they insist on the right of giving play to their natural reactions in answer to any humiliation.  They maintain as self-evident their claim to the world's respect, they dread being looked upon as fools of Christ; they accord a certain role to human respect, and area anxious to stand justified in the eyes of the world also.  

They are not ready for a total breach with the world and its standards; they are swayed by certain conventional considerations; nor do they refrain from letting themselves go within reasonable limits.  There are various types and degrees of this reserved form of the readiness to change; but common to them all is the characteristic of a merely conditional obedience to the Call and an ultimate abiding by one's natural self.  However great the differences of degree may be, the decisive cleavage is that which separates the unreserved, radical readiness to change from the somehow limited and partial.

Dietrech Von Hildebrand
Transformation in Christ, Chapter 1, pp.8

Disney's only story

My son is watching Lilo and Stitch 2 so I figured I'd take a look at what FOCUS ON THE FAMILY says about the movie.  They make an interesting point here:

conclusion: Last summer I spoke with Disney producer Don Hahn (The Lion King, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Beauty and the Beast) about his studio’s habit of turning its main characters into orphans. He said, "By not having a complete family, it represents a catalyst or a dramatic turning point that forces the character to grow up. . . . It’s that crossroads where we all have to decide if we’re going to mature or remain a kid forever. And the thing that gets that going in many of our stories is the absence of a parent or the death of a parent." He’s right, but it’s an overused device. Once again, audiences’ heartstrings are yanked with gusto when they learn that this poor little Hawaiian girl just recently lost her parents in a fatal car accident. It may serve the story. It may even lift the spirits of a child who has faced similar tragedy and realizes that they, too, can overcome desperate sadness and loss. But I’ve often wondered about the cumulative effect of these films on non-orphaned Disney fans, and whether they fear for Mom and Dad’s safety. Over time, they’re exposed to an inflated mortality rate that could create anxiety in some 5-year-olds, leading the most pragmatic tots to quote AFLAC commercials at the dinner table.