Whether it's pro-life philosophy, activism or legislation, whether it's about a current topic or a situation pro-lifers face in their own lives and work, this is the place where we'll talk about it! Please forward any comments to me, Judie Brown. Thank you!
CATHOLIC BISHOPS AND TRUE CHARITY Posted: Friday October 16, 2009 at 2:48 pm EST by Judie Brown
Saint Francis de Sales would have been concerned, if not horrified, at the situation in the Catholic Church in the U.S. today. I say that without reservation because he once said, “It is true charity to point out the wolf wheresoever he creeps in among the flock.”
I have been pointing out the wolf for many years now, particularly as the scandals and problems affect the greatest "treasure of the Church": the Holy Eucharist. Unfortunately, the actions of various members of the hierarchy are, at best, befuddling and, at worst, absolutely outrageous.
Among those things that have caught my attention recently is a spate of news reports that are baffling on many fronts. While I would give any prelate the benefit of the doubt, I am also painfully aware of how such events affect average faithful Catholics who simply cannot believe what they are reading.
Take, for example, the funeral Mass of the recently deceased bishop of Wilmington, Delaware, Michael Saltarelli, who died of bone cancer on October 8. Bishop W. Francis Malooly, who succeeded Bishop Saltarelli, praised him in glowing terms as a faithful servant of the Church.
But Bishop Malooly is the very same bishop who proclaimed he would not and will not deny Holy Communion to Vice President Joseph Biden, who is from his diocese. The bishop claimed at one point that he would not “politicize” the Eucharist. His predecessor, on the other hand, was a defender of the faith. Bishop Saltarelli made it perfectly clear that, regardless of whether or not Biden was elected vice president, he would not be permitted to speak at Catholic schools in the diocese because of his manifest support for the act of abortion.
While Bishop Saltarelli did not go so far as to publicly announce he would enforce Canon 915 and deny Holy Communion to Biden, he did say,
The promotion of abortion by any Catholic is a grave and serious matter. Objectively, according to the constant teaching of the Scriptures and the Church, it would be more spiritually beneficial for such a person to refrain from receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. I ask Catholics in this position to have the integrity to respect the Eucharist, Catholic teaching and the Catholic faithful.
What a tragedy that, between these two bishops who have shepherded the same flock, there is such disparity regarding a fundamental truth of the Catholic faith. If Catholics in the Wilmington diocese are confused, there is good reason. When their shepherds are not united, how should they perceive those in their midst who have public prominence and claim to be Catholic, but support the killing of preborn babies?
On October 12, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Francis Cardinal George, issued a statement on the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama:
In the name of the Catholic Bishops of the United States, I would like to offer congratulations to President Barack Obama on his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. As he has graciously said, much of the work of realizing a more peaceful and just world for all persons and nations remains to be done; but the prize was given because as President of the United States he has already changed the international conversation.
I was stunned to read this and had to ask myself why the USCCB had to make a comment on this event at all. Pope Benedict XVI did not find it necessary to do so. Surely the USCCB must realize that Obama is among the most flagrant abusers of the natural law, due to his disrespect for the lives of preborn babies. To receive a “peace” prize as he continues to preside over the worst type of war – the war against innocent preborn children – simply makes no sense. Why offer such praise in the light of such a stark dichotomy?
The Vatican’s newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, printed a commentary on Obama’s Nobel Prize that stated in part, ”The American president's [war policy] is an oscillating policy, similar to his policy for the important bioethical issues and in the first place, abortion, which has sparked so many disputes among Catholics in the U.S.”
The entire problem of public comments by the USCCB brings me to yet another worrisome event involving the USCCB’s president. Let me preface my comments on this subject by saying that I cannot imagine the weight of responsibility that sits on the shoulders of Cardinal George in his role as the USCCB’s current president. And I have no way of understanding the political pressures that put him in the limelight when he would perhaps prefer to be simply leading his flock in the Chicago archdiocese and remaining focused on souls instead of media quotes. But that is his cross and we pray for him daily.
However, when it comes to the evils that can lurk in a such a massive piece of legislation, especially as it is largely written by proponents of the culture of death, I am perplexed by the USCCB’s push for universal health care reform. Yes, they have made statements regarding abortion and “conscience rights,” but. overall, they seem to strongly endorse yet another big government program in a push for reform in a “must do” and hurried way. Thankfully, some individual bishops are voicing an approach that can bring about needed reform in keeping with Catholic principles, including that of the “principle of subsidiarity.”
Just a couple of days ago, His Eminence spoke about this issue with members of the press and he was quite honest in telling them that the ground is still shifting on the question because the legislative proposals are fluid. He did say, however, that “the abortion issue will vitiate the whole project if it’s not attended to.”
But he then went on to say that the bishops have two goals: “Everybody should be taken care of, and nobody should be deliberately killed. It’s up to the politicians, the lawyers, and legislators to see what the mechanism for doing that is.”
Cardinal George knows as well as we do that, as long as politicians such as Vice President Biden and other pro-abortion Catholics are allowed to continue receiving the body and blood of Christ while advocating the direct murder of the preborn, there will be deceit of the worst possible kind – especially on the subject of health care reform. Let us not forget that the architect of this concept of reform now being pushed in Congress was none other than the late pro-abortion Catholic senator Edward M. Kennedy.
The USCCB's letter to the U.S. Senate of October 8, 2009, lends some hope that the leadership of that body is coming to see things as they really are:
[W]e remain apprehensive when amendments protecting freedom of conscience and ensuring no taxpayer money for abortion are defeated in committee votes. If acceptable language in these areas cannot be found, we will have to oppose the health care bill vigorously.
Any politician who defies Christ and is willing to defile Him by his actions and his words can never be trusted to be truthful about anything, even when dealing with the president of the USCCB.
While it is true that Obama is not a Catholic, it is a documented fact that his community organizing days in Chicago began in an organization funded by the Catholic Church!
Today, many of those doing his dirty work for him, such as House Speaker Pelosi, and Senate Finance Committee members John Kerry,Maria Cantwell and Robert Menendez, are allegedly Catholics, but each is also totally dedicated to abortion on demand. These men and women present a clear and present danger to the Church, to the babies and to any credibility that any promise emanating from the White House might hold to be true. Surely Cardinal George is aware of this.
It makes perfect sense to me that those who hold the positions of greatest influence within the Catholic Church – the bishops, archbishops and cardinals – need to unify. The USCCB should unanimously take a firm position and make it clear that the body and blood of Christ will not be defiled any longer by those in elected office who violate Catholic teaching while maintaining a spurious Catholic identity.
The damage these disobedient Catholic men and women are doing to the credibility of the Church, to consciences of the faithful who are misguided by what they witness and to the preborn children themselves cannot be quantified. Addressing this issue is more urgent than the push for health care reform.
Our Blessed Lord must be perpetually in agony over such scandalous behavior and lack of faith. If the USCCB were to defend the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist from sacrilege and make it their top priority, my sense is that miracles would begin to happen and even White House operatives who are quasi-Catholic might take notice. The Scriptures and the testimony of the saints show that God can work great things through the faithfulness of those who serve Him unreservedly.
When we become more faithful to all that is holy and the discipline our faith demands, then a genuine discussion of principled, ethical health care reform might be considered. But until then, forget about it.
Health care reform and life-and-death control over the weak and vulnerable in our midst do not belong in the hands of an administration dedicated to advancing the culture of death. The bishops know this, and it is my hope they also know that they have the power – the power of the Holy Spirit – to stop the madness by simply defending Christ and letting the chips fall where they may.
“It is true charity to point out the wolf wheresoever he creeps in among the flock.”
Whatever happened to ex-communication in the Catholic faith? When I was a child being raised Catholic, I was told that one could be ex-communicated for getting a divorce, or not receiving holy communion for a year, Etc.
These pro-abortion politicians are parading around as catholic, and are essentially making it seem that abortion is "OK" with the church. Is there any way that all the hypocritical "Catholic" politicians can be publicly ex-communicated from the church? If so, I think it would send a tremendous message, not only to other Catholics, but to the media in general, that you can't be Catholic and pro-abortion.
David Patrick Cox | October 17, 2009
Thank you Judie for boldly standing up for the truth and not allowing fear of financial consequences to control your actions which I believe many Catholic Bishops and Pastors are guided by. You are absolutely right, God will response, as He has done many times before, to those who constantly defend His creation of human life and I pray for those Catholic Public persons who are Members of the Culture of Death Club be they Democrats or Republicans. May God continue to bless you, your family and your organization for the lone "voice that is crying in the wilderness." AL SAQQAL | October 17, 2009
Dear Judie - God bless you! Keep up the great work. Peace. I shall continue to pray for you.
Father Henry Schmidt Father Henry Schmidt | October 17, 2009
Thank you Judie! They do have the power of the Holy Spirit. If our bishops, archbishops and cardinals would come out to the abortion mills, for just an hour of prayer, that would help to end this grave evil that has a grip on our world.
We need more people on the front lines.
Let's ask each other, "what did you do, during the war?"
God Bless You,
Matthew Glynn
Miramar, FL Matthew Glynn | October 17, 2009
Great article - well put. Brian Belanger | October 17, 2009
Thank you for continuing to sound the alarm. Am also appreciative of your faith. Laity and clergy alike must remember we "must not ever tire of doing what is right."
And with hope in His promises each of us can take Psalm 37 to heart: "Commit your way to the LORD; trust that God will act. And make your integrity shine like the dawn, your vindication like noonday."
Defense of the unborn and protecting the Lord Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament from sacrilege must be our commitment.
God Bless you. Fr. William J Kuchinsky | October 18, 2009
Dear David
A divorced Catholic may be able to receive Holy Communion but that's not where the bigger problem comes in. The bigger problem has to do with the divorced and "re-married" Catholic (done so not in keeping with the divine law and that of the Church). Even then, the divorced and remarried Catholic is not supposed to receive Holy Communion but their sinfulness may not reach the threshold of being "manifest."
The example one priest who advises me provides is that many people might not know that a particular person is divorced and re-married - living in adultery/fornication - Father might know it but the parish doesn't and therefore their sin is not "manifest." BUT, if they were to stand out in front of Church as people came in and said: "we're divorced and re-married outside the Church" then their sin would be "manifest" and Father would deny Holy Communion to them. Whereas the pro-abortion politician's sin is "manifest" by it's very nature (public votes, speeches, campaign promises, etc.).
Both the pro-abort politician and the re-married Catholic are not to receive: but the pro-abort politician is to be denied if he or she attempts to receive, whereas the remarried outside the Church may or may not have to be denied. The key word here is MANIFEST!
Judie Brown Judie Brown | October 18, 2009
God Bless you Judie and your powerful words most assuredly guided by the Holy Spirit. I cannot agree more with what you have said and I pray that our Bishops hold to their words. Linda Priest | October 18, 2009
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."
Humpty’s words have developed a new meaning when discussing subjects such as Obamacare, Senator Ted Kennedy and what it means to be Catholic.
The ever-insidious (while always amusing) dissident Catholics United organization has taken a turn toward ugly with recent statements about American Life League’s September 12th poster reading “Bury Obamacare with Kennedy.”
An unsigned blog entry on its web site states:
Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good today called on the American Life League – a group that bills itself as a “Catholic pro-life education organization” – to immediately suspend a campaign aimed at derailing health care reform and dishonoring the legacy of the late Senator Edward Kennedy. The American Life League continues to spread misleading information about so-called “death panels” and “taxpayer-funded abortion,” even as Cardinal Renato Martino, head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, is praising health reform efforts in the U.S.
There’s nothing fair and balanced about this commentary, which offers a politically skewed perspective on the hot topic of health care reform and Catholic teaching. We have never expected intellectual honesty from Catholics United, and they did not disappoint. Their most recent diatribe is a case in point.
For the record, American Life League has not fostered a campaign to “derail” any program that is designed to serve the best interests of the poor among us. This is why we have taken great pains to point out that the Obamacare approach is deadly for the preborn, for the elderly and for the principle of subsidiarity — a principle which should put the government at the service of the poor, not in control of which among them will or will not receive care. The “dictatorship of moral relativism” is the fundamental basis for any of the existing Obamacare proposals. This is why the proposals are not in keeping with true democracy and why we oppose them.
Of course, we are aware that Cardinal Martino in the Vatican takes issue with our perspective on the various health care reform proposals, but we must not forget that there is room in a democracy for a disagreement now and then. Further, we are pleased to point out that Cardinal Martino does not speak for the Vatican, but is simply voicing a personal political opinion on a very controversial topic.
Contrary to the Catholics United screed, there has been nothing in any report or commentary that we have published that has set forth false or misleading information. But let’s move on and see what else they have to say.
The American Life League's campaign is an outrage and an embarrassment to the Catholic community. The organization's interest in scoring cheap political points at the expense of common good solutions to the current crisis in the health care system constitutes a profound disservice to our country and our church. With the number of uninsured teetering at alarming levels and health care costs spiraling out of control for American families, it is simply unfathomable that the American Life League would attempt to turn the moral urgency of health care reform into a reckless and destructive appeal that does irreparable harm to the health of the country and ridicules a much-loved Catholic leader.
Mr. Korzen must have American Life League confused with some fellow dissident organization in his core group or he would never allege that we are involved in pursuing a campaign of disinformation. We are not quite sure what he means when he says that we are opposed to “common good solutions” to the health care crisis.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear in defining the principles that provide the foundation for pursuit of the “common good”: “the common good presupposes respect for the person as such. In the name of the common good, public authorities are bound to respect the fundamental and inalienable rights of the human person.”
Mr. Korzen should read the various health care reform proposals in light of this basic Catholic teaching. We are positive that once he realizes that these proposals provide taxpayer support for aborting the most vulnerable members of the human family, preborn children, he would realize that the documented evidence we share is indeed accurate, which means that Catholics who support these proposals are doing so in defiance of Catholic teaching.
However, Mr. Korzen’s elevation of Senator Ted Kennedy to the pedestal of “much-loved Catholic leader” probably means that he could care less about the “common good” as defined by the Catechism.
And as far as much loved Catholic leaders are concerned, Pope John Paul II was most definitely one, as was Mother Teresa, Father Damien (one of our newest saints), Archbishop Fulton Sheen and others too numerous to mention. Each of these heroic Catholics stood on the shoulders of the magisterium of the Church and defended her teachings with total commitment to Christ. And each of these Catholics put the service of the poor, the downtrodden and the spiritually hungry ahead of everything, raising up the sick, the impoverished and the needy.
On the other hand, Senator Kennedy defied Catholic teaching again and again throughout his public life. The reason our sign pointed out the relationship with Obamacare and Kennedy is a simple one: he was the architect of the plan. He was also a man who advocated the direct killing of the preborn with every ounce of energy he had for more than 30 years. We hope all of the “much loved” of Sen. Kennedy have joined with us in praying for his soul. However, that does not negate the fact that Sen. Kennedy was not a defender of Catholic teaching!
Finally, we get to the crux of problems these misguided Catholics appear to have with American Life League:
“Senator Edward Kennedy, a man of deep faith, spent an entire career in public service committed to common ground and civility about the most pressing moral issues of our time: tolerance for immigrants, dignity for workers, and health care for the sick and vulnerable,” said Victoria Kovari, acting director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. “Senator Kennedy’s commitment to justice and human dignity deserves our deep respect. The American Life League’s attempt to dishonor his legacy by spreading misinformation and fear violates both the spirit and truth of the Gospels, and fails the most basic test of human decency.”
My dear friends, Senator Edward Kennedy was a man who may have had a deep faith — in political power, deception and delusion. He never advocated for the most needy in our midst, the preborn. That is not to say that he was always so misguided. In 1971, he wrote to a constituent, “Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which much be recognized — the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.”
But that position ended after Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, leaving Kennedy in the incredibly tragic situation of being an alleged Catholic who advocated for abortion in every way he could, thus defying Christ and His Church. His views on “human dignity” never included the preborn, and anyone who examines his record is painfully aware of the pain and agony he caused to many by his hypocrisy, all of which is public information.
American Life League makes no apology for setting the record straight, for putting forth the facts in this matter or for continuing to defend Catholic teaching regardless of how uncomfortable that may make those who, like Humpty Dumpty, want words to mean what they say they mean. American Life League is proud of our record in defense of the poorest and neediest in our midst: the preborn, the severely disabled and the elderly. We praise God for the gift of life and the ability to serve His Church in this struggle.
In the spirit of Catholic truth, we ask those involved with Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to examine their allegations in the light of Christ’s admonition to His disciples. Please explain how anyone can hear these words and still defend those who spent a public career committed to denying basic human decency by advocating the murder of little children not yet born:
Obstacles are sure to come, but alas for the one who provides them! It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone put round his neck than that he should lead astray a single one of these little ones. Watch yourselves! (Luke 17:2)
The irony of Ted Kennedy's life is that if Rose Kennedy had not been a devout Catholic who was pro-life to her core, there would have been no Kennedy dynasty nor a Teddy. Teddy, sadly, was a man of many betrayals -- to his faith, to his own family, to himself and to his friends at Chappaquiddick, and to the values he claimed to represent when he was first elected. Of course, he did some good things, but it takes real repentance to erase the stain of his betrayals. How will he answer his accusers on Judgment Day -- the millions of innocents whose lives he could have saved if he had remained true his own traditions? Dennis Howard | October 16, 2009
Hello Judie:
I receive your emails and thank the Lord that somebody is speaking truth based on evidence and providing that evidence when they speak or present their articles.
As you indicate, I too pray that all of our priests, bishops and church hierarchy will begin articulating written and spoken articles that support life in ways that we, the laity, can understand. This would allow us to incorporate into dialogues with our friends, workers, peers and those we meet the truths that we understand and are taught from the Church. The Laity needs to be educated in ways that can help us bring the truth to world and the best way for our education to happen is for the Church to bring us Christ???s truth.
Thank you for speaking out and trying to get as much of the truth out to us as possible for Jesus calls all of us, I pray many more of us will answer ???Not my will but thine be done!???
May the Lord continue to Bless and Prosper the work ALL does.
Alan Unterreiner, President
United for Life of Merced County (California)
Alan Unterreiner | October 16, 2009
God bless you Judie. Keep up your holy work.
Jack Graff John Graff | October 16, 2009
I would agree that health care reform is deadly for the unborn and for the elderly - if those words were in the bill. I am concerned about protections for the unborn, but your hard-right rhetoric won't allow you and the GOP to work with the President on this bill. So once again the necessary work of government will be flawed, owing as much to the intractability of the right as to the misguided intentions of the left. GW | October 19, 2009
Dear GW
The rhetoric used in my commentaries is associated with my firm belief in God and my identity as a Catholic. I am not a Republican; I am not political and my allegiance to to the innocent and vulnerable. To be pro-life is to be right, not intractable.
BAUCUS AND THE POLITICS OF PLURALISM, PRAGMATISM AND REALISM Posted: Wednesday October 14, 2009 at 3:54 pm EST by Judie Brown
The Senate Finance Committee’s vote in favor of the Baucus health care “reform” proposal leaves one with a few questions about the manner in which our representative republic is working these days. According to one news report, the bill is “historic,” but according to what I have read, this bill is nothing to be particularly excited about. It seems that the bill is a genuine counterfeit not only because of its pandering to the states from which Senate supporters hail, but also because it is a boondoggle for taxpayers, and deadly for preborn children and others deemed too costly to maintain.
Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal explains how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cut a special deal that is reflected in the Senate Finance Committee version of the bill, which stipulates that all of his state’s increased Medicaid costs will actually be paid for by the federal government for the next five years. Strassel's impression is that
health-care “reform” is good, smart and necessary, so long as it isn’t fully applied to the states of senators who are pushing it. The Democrats’ growing problem is that somebody is ultimately going to have to pay, and Mr. Reid’s bad example has given everyone the same idea. … Most Senators are saving up their special state demands for when the bill hits the Senate floor. At that point, we’ll get an even better idea of how much health-care change the Democrats truly believe in.
While Senator Orrin Hatch attempted an amendment that would have curtailed abortion funding in the Baucus bill, his effort failed. There is no doubt, even though the actual language of the bill remains in flux, there is nothing truly democratic or historic about it. American Life League has reported on previous versions of Obamacare, each of which have contained specific authorization for tax payer- funded abortion on demand, various anti-life policies that would be applied to the elderly and so forth.
On October 8, four days prior to the Senate Finance Committee vote, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops sent a letter to members of Congress that urged exclusion of mandated coverage for abortion, incorporation of “long-standing” policies against abortion funding and inclusion of protection for conscience rights. Further, in a sentence I find increasingly bizarre, the USCCB wrote, “Reform should make quality health care affordable and accessible to everyone, particularly those who are vulnerable and those who live at or near the poverty level.”
The three bishops who signed this letter—Bishop William F. Murphy, Cardinal Justin Rigali and Bishop John Wester—must be aware that they are writing to a group of politicians who have already made it clear that they don’t give a fig about the most vulnerable human persons in our society, whether they are preborn or otherwise defenseless.
And according to the Wall Street Journal, these politicians aren’t particularly concerned about the impoverished or immigrants either, in part, perhaps, because they have a rather perverted view of what health care reform means in a nation suffering from all manner of financial and moral problems. The idea that a government comprising more than a few unethical public officials should control health care for an entire citizenry is indisputably a frightful one.
Pope Benedict XVI wrote this in Deus Caritas Est (God is Love), issued in October 2006:
The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person--every person--needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need. (Section 28)
This principle, enunciated by the Catholic Church repeatedly over the years, is the last thing many politicians in Washington are interested in upholding because, in my view, they are inebriated with their own egos to an extent that most of us cannot even imagine. There is treachery afoot, which is why I think it wise to revisit subjects such as democracy, representative government, pluralism and pragmatism in order to get the Church’s perspective, so that we remain firmly grounded in truth.
In Veritatis Splendor(The Splendor of Truth), Pope John Paul II taught a profound lesson on what genuine democracy is and how it comes about. In Section 96 he teaches,
The Church’s firmness in defending the universal and unchanging moral norms is not demeaning at all. Its only purpose is to serve man’s true freedom. Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the truth, the categorical--unyielding and uncompromising--defense of the absolutely essential demands of man’s personal dignity must be considered the way and the condition for the very existence of freedom.
This service is directed to every man, considered in the uniqueness and singularity of his being and existence: only by obedience to universal moral norms does man find full confirmation of his personal uniqueness and the possibility of authentic moral growth. For this very reason, this service is also directed to all mankind: it is not only for individuals but also for the community, for society as such. These norms in fact represent the unshakable foundation and solid guarantee of a just and peaceful human coexistence, and hence of genuine democracy [emphasis added], which can come into being and develop only on the basis of the equality of all its members, who possess common rights and duties. When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the “poorest of the poor” on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal.
Clearly then, those elected officials who are determined to impose Obama-style health care “reform” on us have it wrong on at least two counts: respect for the absolute norms of the natural law and adherence to a code of conduct that does not allow deceiving and robbing the taxpayer in order to guarantee their re-election.
Further, the problem of misguided pluralism comes into play. As Pope John Paul II wrote in Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason), “A legitimate plurality of positions has yielded to an undifferentiated pluralism, based upon the assumption that all positions are equally valid, which is one of today’s most widespread symptoms of the lack of confidence in truth” (Section 5).
Indeed, when it comes to the popular attitude, which embodies a flagrant disregard for the dignity of the human person, America’s version of political pluralism fails. Not only are we experiencing a political atmosphere in which taxpayers are being led down a primrose path to servitude, but human beings are being degraded and denied fundamental human rights in every other way.
Health care reform that imposes an undue burden on families as well as policies of death and destruction on the preborn, elderly, infirm and severely disabled, is un-American, is not legitimate pluralism and is diabolical. Furthermore, it is incompatible with the laws of nature, the laws of God and common sense. All opinions on whether or not a human person has dignity and must be respected at every stage of his life are not equal. Some are simply wrong, which brings me to the subject of realism.
The firm conviction that truth never changes and that essential facts are the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, because they are grounded in ethical and moral principles, is the only credible guideline for examining any sort of political activity or philosophy. To realistically examine Harry Reid’s notion of fairness would be to come to the undeniable conclusion that he is a crook. By the same measure, to realistically examine the position President Obama has taken on the act of aborting a child still in his or her mother’s womb would be to come to the undeniable conclusion that Obama is a liar.
I could go on, but I think I have made my point. The problem with today’s brand of politics, whether we are talking about health care "reform," tax-subsidized abortion or conscience protection, is that as long as misguided pluralism is the measure of what is and is not fair, death, destruction, mayhem and madness will ensue. I guarantee it as God is my judge.
PORNOGRAPHY, PILLS, PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND PRAYER Posted: Tuesday October 13, 2009 at 2:16 pm EST by Judie Brown
Planned Parenthood of New York City recently held a fundraising event at — surprise! — a pornography museum. Yes, that’s right. While this did not come as a shock to me, I was taken aback when a friend sent the following e-mail about it: “Planned Parenthood is evil and sick. With this, I think they just answered the question as to whether there is a link between pornography (objectification of women and men, but especially women) and abortion (murder of the most innocent). Both are evil and both are heavily connected to one another.”
Of course, our friend is correct. But the tangled web of grime and sludge, Planned Parenthood’s stock in trade, goes quite a bit deeper than that. Let’s start with the announcement of the event that was held in the Museum of Sex. I looked at the announcement from last year’s sold-out soiree, which is included in the organization’s 2008 annual report. Since this is the second year for the event, it was apparently worth repeating. And for New York City, it had all the right elements: a bar that stayed open all night, after-hours access to the exhibits, raffle prizes and live DJs. A regular party, Planned Parenthood style, complete with all the hoopla one would expect from an organization steeped in sleaze.
But upon further examination of its web site, I found out that this month, Planned Parenthood of New York City is hosting a far more egregious — and, I might suggest, deadly — activity. It is pursuing a project labeled “We’re Going To The Principal’s Office Because Real Sex Ed = Healthy Futures.”
Now that, my friends, will have a far more serious effect on the minds, hearts and souls of children than any event in a sex museum. In case we have forgotten why, let’s take a refresher course on Planned Parenthood philosophy.
At the top of the list is the money it makes by marketing birth control and assuring those who fail to use birth control properly that abortion is just around the corner, should they need it. Why, it’s as simple as using your phone to text a friend.
Then follow along and learn how PPNYC shares information with children. It sponsors a special MySpace page so teens can learn that “under NYS law a doctor can’t tell your parents or anyone else that you’ve had services such as a gynecologist exam or emergency contraception.”
It’s nice to know that PPNYC is working hard, in all the right places, to make sure youngsters are going to think twice about talking to their parents about serious problems and situations that could result in sexually transmitted disease or pregnancy. But today we would be frowned upon for calling people under the age of 17 “youngsters,” wouldn’t we? These young men and women have legally protected reproductive rights, so I guess that makes them mini-adults, even though few can even keep a room clean or finish their homework on time.
If denial of parental rights isn’t enough to get every parent out of their La-Z-Boy and into a mode of discussing daily events with their children, what is? Or could it be that parental apathy is the biggest reason why Planned Parenthood and its pals are gaining greater access to young people on a daily basis?
Parents appear to be signing their role as the first line of defense, discipline and discovery over to the school. And that, in far too many cases, means Planned Parenthood. This defies a simple explanation, but clearly, Planned Parenthood is more than happy to take over. All it needs is the opportunity. And state governments are much too willing to protect a minor’s rights to the point where parents need not apply, even if they want to be involved before there is a health crisis or a dead child.
Victor Medina, a columnist from Texas who is no stranger to controversy, has reported that there is a provision in the health care reform bill that would exacerbate this situation even more. Some argue that it would give Planned Parenthood another leg up on parents by putting school-based sex clinics in the schools. As Medina tells it:
According to the bill, a "sponsoring facility" is "a hospital, a public health department, a community health center, a nonprofit health care agency, (or) a local educational agency." Such broad wording outlining the qualifications for government funds and access to schoolchildren could open the door for groups like Planned Parenthood to operate the clinics in schools with no oversight and full federal government support. The organization currently operates over 850 clinics nationwide.
The clinics would be funded by federal grants awarded by the Obama administration, which has made it clear that they expect Planned Parenthood to play an active role in their proposed health care system. In the midst of the recent national debate this summer and during the Congressional recess over the health care plan, members of the Obama administration were meeting with Planned Parenthood staff and making strong overtures over their potential role in health care reform.
When members of Congress such as Minnesota’s Rep. Michele Bachmann, bring this sort of information to the public, the media jumps all over them. In Bachmann’s case, the left-leaning media is hard at work discrediting her comments, even though the information she described is contained in at least one of the legislative proposals.
Clearly, the problem is far greater than where PPNYC holds a fundraiser, though the choice of location says a lot about its level of decency. Or is that considered to be a bad word as well these days?
My sense is that we have not seen anything yet if, indeed, health care reform’s final version takes on the complexion of a “sex-ed-for-one-and-all” sort of law. In the meantime, there is a great deal that parents and our communities can do to stop Planned Parenthood’s bandwagon in its tracks.
To start, if you are a parent, pray for the insight needed to become a master communicator with your own children. Encourage parents of young people to learn more about properly communicating. I recommend picking up one of Dr. Ray Guarendi’s audiotapes or books.
Learn about the reasons why sex outside of marriage is a bad idea, regardless of who is selling it and the attractive packaging being presented.
And pray very hard for young parents, for their children and for an end to the madness that is currently defining our culture.
PEACE: WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN? Posted: Monday October 12, 2009 at 12:49 pm EST by Judie Brown
The announcement this past Friday that President Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize created quite a stir in the media, within divergent political circles and around the pro-life movement as well.
It cheapens the award to the point that it means nothing, it's just a token. He hasn't done a thing except talk. ... So it demeans the prize to the point that it has no significance. And it's a shame because it belittles all those people that went before.
When I think of peace and Obama, two things stand out as being incongruous. I remember the words spoken by Mother Teresa upon receiving her Nobel Prize. In her acceptance speech, she said a great deal about genuine peace and those things that negate true peace. One memorable line was this: “...the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing - direct murder by the mother herself."
The second was the disingenuous nature of the general discussion that ensued once the announcement became public. Perhaps the single most upsetting comment came from the head of the Vatican press office. According to Catholic News Service:
Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi told journalists October 9 that the news "was greeted with appreciation at the Vatican in light of the president's demonstrated commitment to promoting peace on an international level and, in particular, in recently promoting nuclear disarmament."
"It is hoped that this very important recognition would offer greater encouragement for such a difficult but fundamental dedication to the future of humanity so that it may bring about the desired results," he said in a written statement.
How could anyone at the Vatican be so fogged of brain as to allege that Obama is promoting peace at the same time the man is leading the pro-abortion charge in every corner and at every opportunity?
In addition, there were the remarks given by President Obama himself. The most transparent portion, in my opinion, being the following:
And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the Commander-in-Chief of a country that's responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies. I'm also aware that we are dealing with the impact of a global economic crisis that has left millions of Americans looking for work. These are concerns that I confront every day on behalf of the American people.
The Vatican spokesman talks about the “future of humanity” and Obama mentions a “ruthless adversary.” Neither man takes note of the millions of innocent preborn children who die in a sea full of self-absorption, self-adulation and false hyperbole designed to persuade the world that Mother Teresa must have been off her keel while men like Obama are the real peacemakers.
But it is exactly because of situations like this one that we strive to keep reminding the world — especially those whose heady positions have robbed them of their rational thought process — until we stop murdering innocent children for any reason or no reason, there will not be peace anywhere, from the family to the community to the state to the world. There cannot be peace until the war on the innocent ceases.
One Nobel Peace Prize recipient understood the quintessence of peace as it can only be, while the other disregards the worldwide war against preborn babies, as he claims that he is committed to confronting adversaries allegedly threatening America and her allies.
These two people are oceans apart in their perspectives on the true nature of peace. Mother Teresa knew well, as she said near the end of her Nobel lecture:
[W]e must live life beautifully, we have Jesus with us and He loves us. If we could only remember that God loves me, and I have an opportunity to love others as He loves me, not in big things, but in small things with great love...
Please note that it was not the platitudes that made Mother Teresa a champion of peace; it was her actions in caring for the poor, the dying and the mothers who turned to her instead of the abortionist, and in her clear, publicly enunciated devotion to Christ who is peace.
2304 Respect for and development of human life require peace. Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is "the tranquility of order." Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity.
2305 Earthly peace is the image and fruit of the peace of Christ, the messianic "Prince of Peace." By the blood of his Cross, "in his own person he killed the hostility," he reconciled men with God and made his Church the sacrament of the unity of the human race and of its union with God. "He is our peace." He has declared: "Blessed are the peacemakers."
Those words, “respect for the dignity of persons and peoples,” represent the nucleus, the very basis of true peace. The blood-soaked opposite of peace is what we are witnessing in this nation today under the guise of “freedom of choice.” The maiming, the killing, the dying continues even as the president basks in the glory of his latest achievement. True peace has eluded him, as has its very meaning, which is Christ who suffered and died to teach us that peace requires self-sacrifice and unconditional love.
What does peace really mean? Let us not look to Norway to discover the answer but to Christ, who is the only way to true peace.
I think the Vatican's father Lombardi
made a very gracious, correct statement. frank mcginty | October 12, 2009
Dear Judie, Mother Teresa is indeed one of the most outstanding representatives of peace in recent history. She embodied what the "Peace Prize" should be all about. I am embarrassed for our country that this prize has now been given to a president who does not represent most of us US citizens and supports a holocaust of monumental proportions. I pray that our grass roots pro-life efforts will prevail in Jesus' name.
Bob Ulicki, Cupertino, Calif. Bob Ulicki | October 13, 2009
Are there any Catholics left in the Vatican? Evidence would seem to be to the contrary as shock shown at Vatican spokesman appreciating the farce of Obama peace prize. We're talking about a man who wars on innocents not only inside but also outside of their mothers wombs given his incredible non-support of Born Alive Infant Protection Acts!
We're talking about a man whose warped idea of peace is disarming in the face of the enemy, thereby making the world a more dangerous place to live by orders-of-magnitude! We're talking about a man who shamelessly promotes the entirety of a culture-of-eternal-death under force of law!
Once again apostates masquerading as Catholics in the Vatican do the unthinkable in praising an antichrist! It is folly to encourage nuclear disarmament in a world ruled by the prince of darkness! Pacifism has NEVER been Catholic teaching. It is a bald-faced lie to suggest that it has, is, or ever will be given that the devil prowls the world for the ruin of souls until the end of time!
We are never going to have true peace in the world as long as the devil continues to work toward getting as many people to hell as he can. Our concupiscence (tendency toward sin) as a result of Original Sin due to The Fall will not go away until we meet our Maker in judgment with, hopefully, eternal salvation as our reward in the next life as a function of our actions in this life. That used to be a fundamental precept of our faith. That it is no longer because for many it has become an embarrassment is the root of the problem.
Wars of chastisement result when men mock God! This could very well be our fate with what is about to come. So, to say as the liberal peaceniks do, ???No more war, ever!??? ignores that sometimes wars are used by God to wake us up as to what our main priorities should be, which is of no concern to them given what their ???values??? are. We have seen their values many times nationally ??? the promotion of hedonism at all costs to include our immortal souls. It is ironic that the very individuals decrying ???no more war??? are those most responsible for wars occurring around the world.
God may be giving us another chance to get our priorities in order. But our chances are rapidly running out if we do not wake up because one day, the United States of America will no longer exist. It will be replaced by a regime as oppressive as were those under Hitler and Stalin. God will have finally withdrawn ALL of his protection for our country.
We are living that reality today in what is rapidly becoming the USSA under the tyrant Obama! Such is the fate of nations who gleefully "legally" kill their young in the tradition of Herod, and promote sexual perversion as a civil right in an affirmative action sense!
We either oppose Obama in the realization that he and his minions must be politically destroyed or our country will be! There are no other options as for too long we have mocked God Almighty and now we're feeling His wrath big time!
The fact is that many in the Church, clergy and laity alike, no longer believe that the devil exists. If they did, their priorities would not be ???peace and justice??? in the here-and-now but rather eternal salvation in the here-after. Ultimately non-belief in the devil equates to non-belief in God. I seem to recall that the devil is mentioned quite often by Christ in the New Testament in relation to the serious consequences of unrepentant mortal sin, more so than by any other New Testament figure.
The ???cities of the plain??? in the Bible would have been spared for the sake of ???ten good men.??? It is only through the infinite mercy of God that America to date has been similarly spared. However, the lessons of Genesis must not be forgotten because there are Angels ready to deal with America in the same manner as they did with Sodom and Gomorrah if America continues to mock God in the most barbarous of fashions. To whom much is given, much is expected in return!
What's the Vatican's priority these days, the natural when it should be the supernatural? What's worse, natural or supernatural death? It's getting harder to figure out the answer looking at some of the latest press releases from Rome.
If we are to believe the pacifists' radical reading of Sacred Scripture then if someone breaks into our homes, threatens our families with torture and death, we can do nothing because God does not allow it, which flies in the face of reason. And the God Who gave us faith also gave us reason. God being Omniscient, All-Good, and Perfect Truth cannot contradict Himself.
But beyond this, the Fifth Commandment, first and foremost, applies to those who have an arrogant disregard of the rights of others to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness leading ultimately to supernatural happiness. We are charged with acting responsibly pertaining to these rights, as rights without duty are no rights at all. How, for example, can we rightfully lament the deaths of innocents due to wars while allowing the killing of innocents in the womb? I wonder how many of the peace zealots are pro-life? Or is their idea of peace the aforementioned promotion of hedonism at all costs, the UN variety, to include their immortal souls? Some peace that is! And please remember that this is the same UN that the Vatican spokesmen would have us somehow believe has the moral authority to preach to the world about what it can or cannot do.
Would these same pacifist clergy have appeased Hitler, Stalin and Tojo? If so, if the world would have done nothing, the human misery today would be beyond comparison as the vast majority of the world will be living in assorted gulags with the remainder dying horrible tortured deaths.
There is much to be said for strong deterrents. The fact that the world still exists today given the closeness with which it has almost experienced nuclear destruction speaks to that success.
A judgment is made that the order of justice, to be established and maintained, may require the use of force or the threat of its use. This ???threat of its use??? has undeniably, since the advent of the atom bomb with its horrendous effects provided a deterrent to any country that would consider the use of such weapons of massive destruction in a first strike mode in the realization that such an attack would immediately invite its own destruction, which would eliminate not only the threat of potential enemies but also itself in the process, thereby making nuclear war nonsensical. What other explanation could there be for the prevention of such a holocaust given the lessons of history? When tyrannical totalitarian states have overwhelming force they are prone to use it to suit their nefarious ends. When those states fighting tyranny unilaterally disarm, they are inviting their own destruction and the world's.
We live in an imperfect world because of the Fall and the onset of Original Sin. This is something that has been forgotten by those who propose a ???world political society??? such as Jacques Maritain did in Man and the State. Maritain, despite his protestations to the contrary, proposed a political utopia by nuancing the differences between the state and the body politic. He seemed to feel compelled to do this because of the evolution of weapons of destruction making, in his mind, their use always morally unacceptable. He lays the foundation for what he calls a sound political philosophy leading to a world government. He makes it clear, that he???s not referring to the state as a world government, but rather the body politic, which the state serves.
Let me emphasize once again that the political reality is not the State, but the body politic with its multifarious institutions, the multiple communities which it involves, and the moral community which grows out of it. The body politic is the people organized under just laws. The State is the particular agency which specializes in matters dealing with the common good of the body politic, it is therefore the topmost political agency, but the State is a part, not a whole, and its functions are merely instrumental: it is for the body politic and for the people that it sees to the public order, enforces laws, possesses power; and being a part in the service of the people, it must be controlled by the people.
Maritain wants to transfer a misplaced absolute sovereignty of nation states that are incapable of living together peacefully to a world political body that would oversee these states to insure world stability. This would require a surrender of freedoms on the part of the states for a greater political order, the perfection of the body politic to a common good on a world level. He even goes so far as to propose a ???supra-national advisory council??? whose members, after surrendering their state allegiance, i.e., their citizenship, become world citizens beholding to no one and nothing other than the aforementioned perfection sought by him. For all his good intentions, Maritain???s argument is extremely flawed in that he???s forgotten a basic tenet of his faith, the spiritual battle for our souls until the end of time, which does not provide the guarantee that those whom Maritain would entrust membership to this elite world advisory panel would not turn from virtue to vice in the promotion of hedonism as a civil right. We???re witnessing this currently with the positions taken by the UN, and the European Union in regard to the promotion of the ???culture-of-death??? in all of its manifestations as a function of the contraceptive mentality of the age, i.e., abortion, homosexuality, and euthanasia, all of which are gleefully embraced by Comrade Obama.
Pre-Obama, what we used to see was just the opposite of what Maritain intended. It was the sovereign nation state, namely, the United States of America, due to the recognition of the necessity of authentic freedom being rooted in the Gospel by a significant portion of its citizenry, that stood up to the evil of the father-of-lies whose agents populate world governing bodies. One could counter Maritain that it appears that it is the nation state that is still the place where a sense of human education, national history, and destiny finds its fulfillment ??? albeit a nation state that has not lost its moral compass. Sadly, this is no longer true as America under the dictator Obama couldn't care less about a moral compass. It formerly trashed same the day of Obama's inauguration as the biggest agent of the father-of-lies now masquerades as our president!
We are in the battle for our eternal lives. That is the real war. We cannot fight that battle as referred to in Pope Leo XIII???s prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel if we're not here to fight it, letting the modern Neville Chamberlains tell us that doing nothing will allow for "peace in our time." History and the concupiscence due to Original Sin, which will exist to the end of time, prove otherwise. Do we honestly believe that our unilateral disarmament will make the world a Heaven on earth? If so, then our theology is flawed as that means that Original sin doesn't exist, and the devil does not prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls like a raging lion. Has history, in particular, has our faith taught us nothing?
We are working and perfecting ourselves to the real Heaven that can only be attained by abiding by God's laws, not an illusionary natural "heaven on earth" that exists only in the minds of those who have forgotten the supernatural reasons for their creation, their final end. This is why we have to be ever vigilant putting on the armor of God to fight the spiritual battle and its natural manifestation, as all wars have been, raging around us. To be successful we must be a country under God deserving of His blessing, not His condemnation!
Beware more of he who kills the soul than the body. The former has eternal consequences more horrible than anything that can happen in this life to include especially any and all forms of physical death. Evil came into the world as a result of the concupiscence due to Original Sin. Man caused that by disobeying God, not God. God has withdrawn His protection for our country because we've grievously sinned. If we don't become a country under God, instead of mocking Him by disobeying His laws, then what happened on September 11, 2001 will seem like nothing to what will happen. This is Biblical. How can a country that has sponsored the culture-of-death to the point of exporting it to the rest of the world expect anything else? Did we honestly think that Almighty God would allow Himself to be mocked indefinitely? If we persist in the manner that we have, leading to this tragedy, we're doomed. Thousands lost their lives in New York. Millions have lost their lives in what should have been their most secure haven, their mothers' wombs. And our country not only allowed that to happen but also encouraged and coerced the world to follow in lockstep. On Tuesday September 11, 2001, our country got a wakeup call! On the day of Obama's inauguration, it got its final warning from an angry God who said to us, "You want to live without Me, go ahead and try!"
Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, in the 1983 Templeton Address, prophetically warns that men have forgotten God and such is the origin of modern wars and oppression.
The material laws alone do not explain our life or give it direction. The laws of physics and physiology will never reveal the indisputable manner in which the Creator constantly day in and day out, participates in the life of each one of us, unfailingly granting us the energy of existence. ... To the ill-considered hopes of the last two centuries, which have brought us to the brink of nuclear and non-nuclear death, we can propose only a determined guest for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently spurned.
Is the fact that on one coast thousands of people had their bodies killed, a physical manifestation of the spiritual warfare for our salvation, coupled with the other coast destroying our souls by erasing thousands of years of Judeo-Christian tradition via trashing the family in promoting homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle to the insane extreme of oxymoronic sodomite marriage as "proposed law" in California, "no big thing" to a God Whose mercy is meaningless without His justice? The gospel according to Obamunist liberal pundits answers, "Of course, it's no big thing. How can you be so stupid?" The Gospel according to Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the One, True, Triune God existing from eternity, says our souls are at grave risk of eternal perdition in the fires of hell with the devil and his angels!
Gary L. Morella | October 13, 2009
As a supporter of the massive evil of legalized abortion, which is a war against the unborn, President Barack Obama does not merit the Nobel Peace Prize. Still, it is justifiable for the Vatican to welcome President Obama's declaration that nuclear disarmament is the official policy of the United States, for this declaration is in line with the teaching of the Catholic Church on war and peace. In section 508 of *Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church*, the Church tells us that general disarmament is a crucial goal. As blogger Stephen Hand pointed out in a caption superimposed on a photo of an unborn child, "they need a world to be born into."
We should pray that the President's advocacy of the Church's objective of nuclear disarmament will be a stepping stone toward his conversion to the true Faith.
Stephen M. O'Brien | October 13, 2009
Dear Mr. McGinty
That's nice, but you do know, of course, that Obama is totally pro-war on the innocent which is certainly not a path to peace.
Judie Brown Judie Brown | October 13, 2009
It is pretty hard to ignore that this Nobel Peace Prize winner is warring against his own country's moral foundations, if not God Himself. He names Kevin Jennings as director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. He says, "You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman." He appoints as many pro-abortion "Catholics" as he can find. He says he will remove conscience protection for medical workers. He directs the health care "reform" measures defer restrictions to appointees, rather than spelling them out in the law. And he directs his Congressional leadership to disallow all amendments to explicitly protection conscience and ban abortion funding with Federal money. David Volk | October 13, 2009
Judie, God bless you in your untiring work of saving the babies. You have the beautiful words and heart to do this, and with God's blessings you continue to proclaim the truth! I am proud to be a contributor and faithful reader of your beautiful "Celebrate Life" and everything else you send me to read. Some day this great evil of the "culture of death" will be stopped, but it will take many people saying many prayers. More support is needed and I have spoken out many times for this with my friends. Keep up your beautiful work, Judie, and God bless you and your family. Marie Carlson | October 13, 2009
Thank you Judie Brown and Gary Morella for your insightful comments.
October 9, 2009 when I woke up to hear on the radio that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Barack Obama, I felt sick.
I am sure many Catholics are perplexed when they hear beloved Bishops and priests extolling politicians whose agenda is in opposition of God's teachings and outright, attacks on the unborn and the family. Surely, these Bishops, Priests and Church leaders must know of the anti-life agenda of President Barack Obama?
October 13, 2009 the Senate Finance Committee passed their form of the health care reform, Baucus bill. Currently, all the health care reform bills that are being debated and rushed through Congress have abortion mandates in them despite attempts of amendments to exclude abortions.
How many Catholics are aware of the abortion mandates in the health care reform? And there is more than the abortions mandate which should cause people to be concerned and voice their disapproval to Congress.
http://www.healthreformscam.com is a good website to help sort out the truths from the many untruths in the health care reform. It would be wise to see what the pro-life organizations are saying about health care reform and the life issues as well.
Recently, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a "Hate Crimes" provision within the defense authorization bill. "By granting a special protection for a particular group, we diminish protections and thereby penalize everyone else . . . . This sets us on a slippery slope toward serious infringements of the freedom of speech and freedom of religion. 'Hate Crime' legislation will lay the legal foundation and framework for investigation, prosecuting and persecuting pastors, business owners, and anyone else whose actions reflect their faith," concluded Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council.
Family Research Council during the spring of 2009 was the first organization to highlight the radical record of Kevin Jennings, President Obama's choice for "safe schools czar." http://frc.org/
There were, also, false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their licentious ways, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. In their greed they will exploit you with fabrications, but from of old their condemnation has not been idle and their destruction does not sleep. 2Peter 2: 1
As Christ followers, we need to put on the whole armor of Christ. The devil still prowls for the ruin of souls.
Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception,
pray for us and the conversion of all souls.
A NURSE'S VIEW OF ETHICS AND HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION Posted: Friday October 9, 2009 at 11:09 am EST by Judie Brown
by Nancy Valko, RN
As a nurse for 40 years, I have long been very concerned about the direction our health system has been taking. Now, I am becoming truly frightened by the significant changes that government’s proposed health care reform would cause.
I’ve read much of HR 3200, [one of three] health care reform bill[s] currently being pushed by the Obama administration, and I agree with the critics who worry about potential taxpayer-funded abortion, rationing of care and promotion of the “right to die”. Like them, I am also concerned about a massive governmental overhaul of our health care at an exorbitant financial as well as moral cost.
Much of the bill’s language is murky legalese that is hard to understand. Much of the language is vague enough to allow all sorts of interpretations — and consequences. Worse yet, efforts to insert limits on such issues as taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand so far have been rebuffed — or concealed in various ways. Government officials who advocate the proposed health care reform legislation are furiously trying to allay the fears of the increasing number of citizens who oppose the bill — but we have only to look at the statements and philosophy of the people supporting this bill to recognize potential dangers. Here are some examples:
— Compassion and Choices (the newest name for the pro-euthanasia Hemlock Society) boasted that it “has worked tirelessly with supportive members of congress to include in proposed reform legislation a provision requiring Medicare to cover patient consultation with their doctors about end-of-life choice (section 1233 of House Bill 3200).”
— On abortion, President Barack Obama not only said “I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose” on the January 22, 2009 anniversary of Roe v. Wade, but he also moved to rescind the recently strengthened federal conscience-rights protections for doctors and nurses who object to participating in abortion.
— On rationing: Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, President Obama’s health care advisor, wrote in the January 2009 issue of the British medical journal Lancet about using a “complete lives system” to allocate “scarce medical interventions.” He wrote that, “When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” Dr. Emanuel [co-]wrote a 2005 article on the Terri Schiavo case, bemoaning the low percentage of people signing “living wills” and other advance directives and stated, “Cases such as these also introduce economic issues, as the costs of keeping people alive — especially in the ICU — are substantial.”
End-of-Life Issues a Major Concern
Just recently, a judge in Montana, acting alone, declared assisted suicide legal, making Montana the third state with legalized assisted suicide. Last year, cancer patient Barbara Wagner received a letter from the state-run Oregon Health Plan that denied coverage for an expensive drug for her recurrent lung cancer, but agreed to cover drugs for assisted suicide as “palliative” or comfort care that would cost around 50 dollars. This past July, a New York nurse sued her hospital after she allegedly was pressured into participating in a late-term abortion.
Around the country there are instances where judges refuse to allow the implementation of state laws mandating parental notification, women’s right to know information and abortion clinic safety regulations.
Unfortunately, those of us who try to be ethical health-care professionals cannot turn to the mainstream national organizations like the American Medical Association and the American Nurses Association for help. I’ve been particularly alarmed that the ANA, like Planned Parenthood, is so vocal in its support of the newly proposed health-care-reform legislation.
Like most nurses, I do not belong to the ANA. Though I was formerly a member of ANA, and tried to work for change, I withdrew my membership when the ANA opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion. Since then, the ANA has also opposed strengthened conscience clause protections and supported the “right to die” in the Terri Schiavo case.
As a nurse, I believe that not participating in abortion is a moral and natural imperative, not a “choice.” And also as a nurse, I’ve seen the effects of the “right-to-die” movement on health-care providers and their education over the years. Personally, I have become sick of hearing that this or that patient “needs to die” when the patient or family chooses not to withdraw basic care or treatment. Unfortunately, there are a lot of medical people and prominent ethicists who don’t really believe in free choice when it comes to the “right to die” and who actually do think some patients are a drain on the health care system and society. Not surprisingly, many of them also support direct euthanasia.
President Obama said in an April interview, “The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.”
The present context of the moral and ethical issues makes it particularly worrisome for the proposed health-care-reform legislation’s plan to mandate “end-of-life counseling”.
Mounting concern about what is really involved in the administration’s health care reform proposals has met with unexpected resistance. It’s been amazing to watch the throngs of people of all ages making their voices heard at town hall meetings. I’ve been especially impressed by the older citizens. It seems that seniors who may once have told their children that they didn’t want to ever be a burden have now awakened to the realization that soon government-appointed ethicists may decide when a person is “too burdensome” to be allowed to live.
Some of the criticism of HR 3200 now seems to be finding its mark. Dr. Emanuel, who at first maintained that critics were taking quotes from his writings out of context, now says that his views have “evolved”, and that he no longer supports health care rationing. And Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley now says, regarding the upcoming Senate version of health care reform, “We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly.”
These are hopeful developments — much, much more is necessary. The architects of what is now often termed “Obamacare” are still determined to win passage of a comprehensive health care bill, and pro-abortion groups demand unlimited abortion coverage. Politicians’ continued reassurances are most often mere repackaging of bad ideas. Influential ethicists who support abortion and the “right to die” can be expected to resist opposition as vigorously as ever.
Good Health Care Reform
Of course, we must continue to be serious about making health care better, especially when it comes to the moral and ethical foundation of our health care system. It can be done.
A few years ago, I was privileged to serve on a Catholic Medical Association task force on health care reform. Many great ideas, such as health savings accounts, ways to help the uninsured poor, and better conscience-rights protections, were developed and published in a 2004 report entitled “Health Care in America: A Catholic Proposal for Renewal.” Some of these ideas already have support in Congress.
Many of our bishops have been addressing these crucial issues, as well. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has a health care reform web section to provide information, action alerts, statistics, statements and other resources.
As I write this in August 2009, the future of the government’s proposed reform of health care is still in dispute... What is indisputable is that all citizens need to be informed and especially to be heard on this crucial issue that affects all of us.
In early August, the National Association of Pro-life Nurses, of which I am a member, issued a statement of guiding principles necessary for any ethical health care reform:
Position Statement on Health Care Legislation of the National Association of Pro-life Nurses
Because proposed health-care legislation affects those of us in the nursing profession directly, the National Association of Pro-life Nurses issues the following guidelines to be included in any approved proposal.
• The bill must not include any mandate for abortion
• Abortion funding prohibitions must be included to reflect long-standing bans in place
• State laws regulating abortion must be upheld
• There must be protection of the conscience rights of health care workers, and
• Any plan adopted must include full prenatal and delivery care for all pregnancies.
In addition, we are opposed to mandating end-of-life consultation for anyone regardless of age or condition because of the message it sends that they are no longer of value to society. Such consults place pressure on the individual or guardian to opt for requests for measures to end their lives.
We believe those lives and ALL lives are valuable and to be respected and cared for to the best of our abilities. Care must be provided for any human being in need of care regardless of disability or level of function or dependence on others in accordance with the 1999 Supreme Court decision in the Olmstead v. L. C. Decision.
Adopted by the Board of Directors [on ] August 3, 2009.
Reprinted with permission from Voices online edition, Vol. XXIV, No. 3, Michaelmas 2009, which is published by Women for Faith & Family. Nancy Valko, a registered nurse from St. Louis, is president of Missouri Nurses for Life, a spokesperson for the National Association of Pro-Life Nurses and a Voices contributing editor.
HUMAN PERSONHOOD AND WOMEN Posted: Thursday October 8, 2009 at 2:31 pm EST by Judie Brown
In our pursuit of state and federal constitutional protection for all human persons from the beginning of their biological development, we frequently hear that “the right for women to make private medical decisions regarding their reproductive health” will be jeopardized once human personhood is recognized by law. Most recently, this claim was made by Allyson Hagen of NARAL Pro-Choice Montana. It must be addressed head-on because it is so false and misleading.
What exactly is “reproductive health” anyway? Well, as opposed to the all-inclusive whole health of a human being, it seems that “reproductive health” deals only with a certain mechanism in the female body that can, if used in a certain way at a particular time of the month, give a nod to a preborn child. In other words, “reproductive health” is all about the ability of a female to get pregnant. That alone raises some questions:
Is pregnancy a disease?
Does birth control treat an illness? Or is it a recreational drug?
Are women safer now that they can ingest chemicals to fool their bodies and pay for surgical procedures that kill their babies?
NARAL and their ilk don’t address these questions. Shouldn’t they?
The completely natural state of being pregnant, or “with child” as we like to say, is understood by most people to be a temporary state that will culminate in the birth of a child. Nothing harmful there, right?
Well, not according to the proponents of “reproductive rights.” However, we must understand that all of their voiced and inferred platitudes are based on lies, because abortion itself is a lie.
It is abundantly clear that the “reproductive rights” crowd failed to mention a few things about the female and her personhood.
Let’s start with the fact that every female human being has a right to know exactly what is at stake if she ingests a chemical to have sexual relations (theoretically, without consequences) or chooses to pay someone to abort her own child. She deserves respect, honesty and integrity from those she confides in when seeking information or asking questions about matters that will impact her for the rest of her life.
Organizations such as NARAL, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and National Organization for Women always fail to point out that there is a proven link between abortion and breast cancer. There is also a similar link between chemical contraception and various forms of cancer. The proof is available, but not shared, if a woman happens to encounter someone who advocates “reproductive health.”
The woman featured in Ignatius Productions’ YouTube video makes it clear that “the destruction of my health would have had to have begun the day I entered an abortion clinic 11 years ago.” This is a real person, a human being, whose choices were never defined for her in terms of what might happen to her body, her mind and her soul if she chose abortion or used birth control. Yet this woman’s story is not front page news; nor will “reproductive rights” advocates make it a priority on their let’s-talk-about-your-choices agenda.
A second video, from Ends of the Earth Productions, features the facts about breast cancer, abortion and contraception. All of the information is documented, but apparently not of much interest to those who claim to be concerned about women’s reproductive rights or health. It’s not a stretch to figure out why, but let’s move on.
What about the pain of abortion? Isn’t it a fact that mothers who abort their children suffer post traumatic stress disorder? According to “Hidden pain: Politics suppresses the problems of many post-abortive women,” a recent article by Matt Anderson, a Minnesota-based obstetrician/gynecologist, the tragedy of post-abortion suffering is enormous. He writes,
Published, peer-reviewed studies from New Zealand, Australia, and the United States show a link between abortion and alcoholism, substance abuse, depression, and anxiety, among other less common negative effects. Personally, I can attest to the despair, depression, what-ifs, and regrets women have after induced abortion.…
Since abortionists and pro-abortion researchers have access to abortion patients and therefore do most research on abortion complications, the results are predictable. My residency program in OB/GYN had a large abortion service. They would send out a questionnaire to women who underwent an abortion and the doctors doing their post-abortion visit, asking questions about complications. It came as no surprise to me that those wearing the "Keep Abortion Safe and Legal" buttons—the ones who collated the data—always found few complications.
When the fox guarding the hen house says all the hens are just fine, what do you think?
The politics of abortion advocacy has tainted medical research and medical researchers into claiming safety and no long-term adverse mental effects for a procedure that takes a pre-born human life. Excellent studies contradict their conclusions, conclusions that fundamentally lack the ring of truth. If you doubt that abortion causes long-term negative effects on women and think the APA is right, try asking a post-abortive woman, "How do you feel about your abortion?"
These mothers deserve our respect, consolation and the full truth. They do not deserve lies, half truths, innuendo and political gobbledygook. While that may occur when she visits her OB/GYN to talk about a discomfort she is experiencing or a problem she is having, it does not occur when she is getting guidance from a “reproductive rights” advocate.
On the one hand, these people claim that passage of a state or federal human personhood amendment will jeopardize women. On the other hand, they are jeopardizing women and their human personhood on a daily basis. Financial gain and political power mean more to these hypocrites than the human personhood of the woman they claim to care about so desperately, so passionately and yet so dishonestly. But let’s move on.
Think about the woman who is sexually violated by rape or incest and her baby, should she become pregnant. What of her human personhood and that of her child? Such a subject is never discussed in polite company. Yet as one woman’s story confirms, even on this subject, “reproductive rights” advocates are behind the eight ball.
Juda Myers is a lovely woman who was conceived in rape. Today, she has a ministry that reaches out to others who are suffering. As her web site states,
Forgiveness in any case is attainable! Destiny, filled with purpose and potential waits for each of us through the one who created us. Knowing Jesus Christ personally will guarantee that life of purpose and joy indescribable. If you're miserable and life isn't worth living, there is a solution.
Juda’s story, and her birth mother’s courage, are presented for one and all to see, hear and absorb. Yet those who advocate for abortion in these situations would dismiss Juda’s witness by ignoring the truth about the tragedy that can be avoided when one affirms human personhood for both mother and child.
There are myriad reasons why proponents of “reproductive rights” will not tell the truth. And it has nothing to do with good health. Even when dealing with underage females — human persons who are still developing emotionally, physically and intellectually — these harbingers of death are not honest. If they were, Planned Parenthood would not be running morning-after pill and birth control pill clinical trials involving 13-year-old girls, would they? If Planned Parenthood respected the human personhood of these young women, every effort would be made to affirm their self-respect rather than abuse their bodies with chemical assault weapons.
Clearly, the bottom line with “reproductive health/rights” advocates, who consistently call foul when human personhood is discussed, is money, political influence and public confusion. The actual facts and honest defense of human personhood, including that of their female client base, is the farthest thing from their minds.
It’s up to us to make sure we confidently and unapologetically affirm everyone’s human personhood, especially for the women in our midst who have become a meal ticket for far too many with a vested interest in death and human destruction.
Pro-Life Story: It was illegal when I was born... Thank God! Posted By D. S. on Aug, 27 2008 My mother became pregnant with me in 1966. I guess this was quite a scandal. Since abortion was not legal and she couldn't afford the proverbial "back-alley-coat-hanger-special" ... Read
