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!
ARCHBISHOP RAYMOND BURKE: A HUMBLE MAN OF GOD Posted: Friday October 23, 2009 at 3:33 pm EST by Judie Brown
When I read the news that Archbishop Raymond Burke, who currently heads the Vatican’s equivalent of the U.S. Supreme Court, had just been appointed by Pope Benedict XVI to serve the Church as a member of the Vatican Congregation for Bishops, I was elated.
He has been such a heroic figure to all of us. Setting aside his enormous grasp of Catholic teaching, his intellect and his commitment to defending truth, perhaps his most endearing characteristic is his humility. You have to be in his presence to know what I am saying, but anyone who has even been in the same room with him knows it. One experiences a feeling of peace and joy just by looking at his face. These are but a few reasons for my total elation over the Holy Father’s selection of my favorite archbishop for yet another Vatican post where we know he will do great things for God.
American Life League immediately issued a statement of congratulations, which I am sure would embarrass His Excellency. But when good things happen to extraordinary people, it’s nice to say a good word.
In the wake of this news, I felt it would be appropriate to recall some of the profound statements enunciated during his recent speech at Inside Catholic’s 14th Annual Partnership Dinner.
Reminding the attendees that “God has created us to choose life,” Archbishop Burke exhorted pro-life people and, in fact, all faithful Catholics, to therefore “never give up in the struggle to advance a culture founded on the choice of life, which God has written upon our hearts, and the victory of life, which Christ has won in our human nature.”
I believe it is no accident that he made the point that abortion cannot be fought in isolation, which the Church has made repeatedly. One must first understand the connection between contraception, the abuse of human sexuality and the act of killing an innocent preborn child. He said,
The attack on the innocent and defenseless life of the unborn has its origin in an erroneous view of human sexuality, which attempts to eliminate, by mechanical or chemical means, the essentially procreative nature of the conjugal act. The error maintains that the artificially altered conjugal act retains its integrity. The claim is that the act remains unitive, even though the procreative nature of the act has been radically violated. In fact, it is not unitive, for one or both of the partners withholds an essential part of the gift which is the essence of the conjugal union. The so-called “contraceptive mentality” is essentially anti-life. Many forms of so-called contraception are, in fact, abortifacient, that is, they destroy, at its beginning, a life which has already been conceived.
The manipulation of the conjugal act, as Pope Paul VI prophetically observed, has led to many forms of violence to marriage and family life (Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, “On the Proper Regulation of the Propagation of Offspring,” 25 July 1968, no. 17). Through the spread of the contraceptive mentality, especially among the young, human sexuality is no longer seen as the gift of God, which draws a man and a woman together, in a bond of lifelong and faithful love, crowned by the gift of new human life, but as a tool for personal gratification. Once sexual union is no longer seen to be, by its very nature, procreative, human sexuality is abused in ways that are profoundly harmful and even destructive of individuals and of society itself. One has only to think of the devastation which is daily wrought in our nation by the multi-million dollar industry of pornography. Essential to the advancement of the culture of life is the proclamation of the truth about the conjugal union, in its fullness, and the correction of the contraceptive thinking which fears life, which fears procreation.
This is the heart of the pro-life message. It addresses what underlies the highly problematic moral relativism spewed not only by many politicians but by many ordained to the Catholic priesthood. It is impossible to focus on ending the killing of the preborn unless we also focus on the root causes of this tragedy.
At a profound level, Archbishop Burke has always understood this, as well as the reality that the child hidden in the womb of his mother or barely visible in a petri dish is a human person as truly as the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ are present in the Holy Eucharist. Nonetheless, our opponents spend millions dehumanizing the preborn baby and disparaging Catholic teaching, as exemplified by anti-Catholic TV personality Bill Maher, who has likened Holy Communion to cannibalism.
We have heard, witnessed and been the targets of so many attacks against defenders of human personhood and Christ’s real presence in Holy Eucharist. We know the truth of what His Excellency told his audience as he quoted from the late, great Pope John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae (section 58):
The acceptance of abortion in the popular mind, in behavior and even in law itself, is a telling sign of an extremely dangerous crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of distinguishing between good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception.
He underscored his point by explaining that, in fact, a phrase such as “common good” cannot be equated with “common ground,” as some, including President Obama, have attempted to do:
The common good refers to an objective perfection which is not defined by common agreement among some of us. The common good is defined by creation itself as it has come from the hand of the Creator. Not only does the notion of common ground not correspond to the reality of the common good, it can well be antithetical to it (for instance, if there should be common agreement in society to accept as good for society what is, in reality, always and everywhere evil).
In the words of Pope Benedict XVI, the common good “is the good of ‘all of us’, made up of individuals, families and intermediate groups who together constitute society” (Caritas in veritate, no. 7).
Inside Catholic's founder and director, Deal Hudson, reflecting on Archbishop Burke's address, wrote,
Archbishop Burke describes the latest tactic of pro-abortion Catholic politicians, who talk about finding common ground, as a form of “proportionalist moral reasoning.” “Common ground is found rather on ‘the ground of moral goodness,’ and not in a compromise of certain moral truths, like the rejection of abortion and euthanasia.”
He warned against allowing this kind of false reasoning to enter the health-care debate. A Catholic cannot accept the attainment of universal health care if it includes abortion and other evils “just because it achieves some desirable outcomes.”
In this form of reasoning, the archbishop hears an echo of the type of “seamless garment” argument that conceals a distinction between intrinsically evil acts and those that may be evil in some situations; these acts “are not all of the same cloth.”
The standing ovation for Archbishop Burke lasted several minutes before Raymond Arroyo, the master of ceremonies and news director of EWTN, returned to the podium….
As InsideCatholic.com editor Brian Saint-Paul handed Archbishop Burke the award for “Service to the Church and our Nation,” I commented that “[t]his lion speaks with the voice and face of a lamb, and, thus, is an example of how to speak the truth in charity.”
We agree! Archbishop Raymond L. Burke is an example to all of us as a teacher of truth and goodness. God bless His Excellency!
HOW TO DRIVE THE CULTURE OF DEATH CRAZY IN ONE SIMPLE LESSON Posted: Thursday October 22, 2009 at 3:41 pm EST by Judie Brown
There’s got to be a reason why there is so much whining in the pro-abortion movement right now. The recent behavior of the folks at RH Reality Check, National Abortion Rights Action League (I mean NARAL Pro-Choice America) and elsewhere is very interesting. These people are seriously distraught over our insistence that every human being, from his beginning, has a right to equal protection under the law.
NARAL’s latest video production, Women Can’t Lose, focuses on our efforts, and Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, referred to American Life League during the first 60 seconds of a recent speech. Not only that, but as LifeNews.com’s Steven Ertelt reports, Keenan is getting downright hostile toward those of us who understand the cruelty of taking the life of even one innocent preborn baby:
“I’ll be honest -- we all expected a fight from the usual anti-choice agitators on health-care reform,” she said. “We expected it from Rep. Michele Bachmann, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), the Family Research Council, and the American Life League.”
She accused [Michigan Congressman] Stupak of “carrying the right wing’s water on this issue.”
“Stupak is ready to jeopardize the entire health-care reform bill to stand between women and their doctors,” Keenan claims.
“He’s willing to undermine health-care reform -- blocking the landmark bill from even coming to a vote -- in order to impose an abortion ban on women in the reformed health system. His proposal would take away coverage from women who already have it,” she says, even though the latter claim is not the case.
My, oh my! Could it be that we at American Life League, and our pro-life friends, are touching nerves that make our opponents nervous? I wonder why? Is the pro-life fly on the pro-death movement’s oversized chassis starting to create a big pain that can no longer be ignored by the vigilantes for “choice”?
What could be so nerve-racking for Keenan about a simple standard that prohibits payment for child killing in any health care “reform” bill? The answer, quite simply, is that the proponents of death for the preborn see big bucks coming their way. They don’t mind deceiving expectant mothers into believing abortion is a choice, not an act of killing. They just want our tax dollars to pay for the dirty deed. Keenan says it’s all about reproductive rights, after all, not about those expectant mothers and their future pain, should they actually decide to abort.
The lesson to be learned from this is a simple one. When the pro-life movement stays on message, doesn’t play games with politicians, presses forward and repeats the facts, the other side gets as nervous as a kindergarten student preparing for his first Christmas pageant. All we pro-lifers have to do is remain steadfast; the rest is easy.
Meddling busybodies are back, sneaking around behind the scenes and trying to abort Montana’s constitutional right to privacy.
Last weekend, a national anti-choice group slithered into three Montana cities, including Missoula, to launch a petition drive with the covert intention of stopping abortions. In order to do that, the Virginia-based American Life League wants Montanans to rewrite our constitution. The proposed Constitutional Initiative 102 would define “person” as starting “from the beginning of the biological development of that human being” — basically anything with one or more human cells. If this group has its way, the due process clause that says “no person should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law” would apply to an egg the minute it is pierced by the head of a sperm, even if it sits in a test tube.
I will give Lundquist credit for understanding the fundamental meaning of human personhood, even if her spin is off base. After all, working to protect the human rights of all persons from the moment their lives begin is in keeping with America’s traditional defense of the innocent; it’s certainly nothing that requires slithering or sneaking. I guess that when our team visited the Big Sky state, the message made sense, so poor Laura had to say something negative.
Jodi Jacobson, a blogger on the anti-life RH Reality Check web site, opines about the human personhood effort in Michigan, telling her readers that with the economy being in such poor shape and women struggling to pay for “family planning services” such as contraception and abortion, state legislators should not be attempting to garner support for a resolution that might open the way to placing a personhood measure on the ballot in that state. She writes,
The implications of these so-called “personhood” amendments, which are spreading like the swine-flu in state legislatures, such laws would also outlaw any activity or medical treatment required by a woman--radiation or chemotherapy for breast cancer, say--that might interfere with the “personhood” of fertilized eggs, or the possibility that a fertilized egg might be present in the carrier of said egg-people.
In case Jacobson’s silliness troubles you, let me set the record straight. A human personhood proposal affirms that all human beings, including those not yet born, have equal rights and that their human rights should be protected. The effect would be to restore the integrity of this statement in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
This is why the human personhood message is spreading like the good news that it is—quite the opposite of swine flu. Americans are sick of the pro-abortion tirades and are increasingly uncomfortable with the whole idea of killing babies prior to birth. It’s as simple as that, really. And as far as radiation treatments, chemotherapy and other treatments for disease are concerned, the ethical physician who is treating an expectant mother always provides proper guidance to her because he knows that he is dealing with two patients, even though pro-abortion stalwarts like Jacobson prefer to ignore one of the doctor’s two patients.
Oh, and speaking of the swine flu, Amanda Hess just reported that that the ordeal of swine flu victim Aubrey Opdyke, whose horrific suffering resulted in losing her preborn child, her ability to walk and more, has not been properly reported by others. Hess tells her readers,
In [New York Times reporter] McNeil’s profile of Opdyke, losing the baby was “most important”—more traumatic than even falling into the coma, suffering a seizure, temporarily losing the ability to walk, talk, and see her family, and facing death. The trauma of losing a child in the womb is clearly central to Opdyke’s experience. But it is still Opdyke’s experience—the ordeal is hers, not her baby’s.
No, Amanda, the ordeal was that one person died and the other will grieve for that loss. The whole experience of losing that baby was so tragic that Opdyke's husband of 16 months had photos taken of their baby girl, Parker Christine, who died shortly after birth, so that, when sufficiently recovered, Opdyke could at least see the daughter she lost due to swine flu complications.
To callously toss off this baby’s death as nothing more than another side effect of Opdyke’s devastating illness is chilling. However, it underscores the fact that for women such as Hess and her confreres in the shrinking culture-of-death cartel, these babies count for nothing. And that is the greatest tragedy of all.
If pro-life Americans were not having a positive effect on our culture, people such as Hess, Jacobson and Keenan would not be exhibiting such a bizarre degree of hysteria. I feel badly for these women. I worry about their dysfunctional attitudes toward the wonder and beauty of life, motherhood and family, and I pray for them. But I am eternally grateful to my friends in all the many spheres of our united pro-life effort. We are truly blessed to be of one mind in this work. We join with David Bereit, national director of 40 Days for Life, in a prayer that should be on our lips and in our hearts as we persist in our quest for human personhood and pray for our enemies:
O God, our heavenly Father, give us courage and wisdom as we seek to eradicate the evil in our society. Help us to realize that Your divine Spirit alone can change hearts and minds so that all Your human creatures may enjoy the fullness of life You intended for them. I pray this prayer in the name of Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior. Amen.
Thank you ALL for the work you're doing to protect our truly innocent, the unborn child.
You are angels! I'll keep you in my prayers. Patricia Gehlen | October 23, 2009
Judie, excellent analysis as usual.
2 things I have to comment on though.
1: When Laura Lundquist used the term "slithered" is she sure she isn't talking about NARAL & PP?
2: Jodi Jacobson's misleading comments on medical treatments she claims the personhood amendment would ban is disgusting. She is using what I see as a disgusting scare tactic that she knows is a lie. She knows that radiation & chemo would not be banned for pregnant woman any more than they are now.
As I said, keep getting the truth out. They are scared, thus the whining, because they know that as it does, people will come to support our efforts to protect all human life. Al | October 25, 2009
HEALTH CARE REFORM AND THE POTENTIAL FOR MADNESS WITHOUT PITY Posted: Wednesday October 21, 2009 at 3:31 pm EST by Judie Brown
In her seminal book Dialogues with the Devil, Taylor Caldwell digs deep into a fictional Lucifer’s psyche as well as that of Saint Michael the Archangel. While it is a work of fiction, there are profound insights throughout, including Lucifer’s description of human beings who choose to do evil. He tells Saint Michael, “Evil is madness and has no pity, and therefore it is confusion thrice compounded. Evil men possess no wits. They are easily led to believe what they wish to believe.”
These succinct phrases are very applicable to that grave fear of the unknown many Americans experience at the thought of the federal government managing everyone’s health insurance. My sense is that these concerns are not far off the mark. A visit to the real world is in order before anyone jumps up to claim that Judie Brown is just a right-wing fanatic who doesn’t care about all those millions of Americans without health insurance. This persistent allegation about my intentions is false, but what I am about to share is very real.
Two years ago, at the University of California at Berkeley, Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor under Clinton and current Obama economics advisor, spoke candidly about health care rationing. His comments are a matter of public record. The following excerpt exemplifies the serious ethical problem in certain politicians' thought process: “[I]f you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive...so we’re going to let you die.”
This past week, the pro-assisted suicide organization Compassion and Choices focused attention on a court case, Blick v. Connecticut, which it claims could lead to a court ruling on “whether a mentally competent, terminally ill patient’s desire to bring about a peaceful death should be considered ‘suicide.’ Connecticut physicians Gary Blick and Ron Levine are asking a Connecticut court to rule that the state assisted suicide statute does not reach their conduct in providing aid in dying.”
On her Living His Life Abundantly web site, well known EWTN personality Johnette Benkovich posted an article by journalist Susan Brinkmann that gets to the heart of why a ruling on Blick v. Connecticut could have deadly consequences:
Opponents of assisted suicide, or aid in dying, cite the many serious problems occurring in the two U.S. states that allow assisted suicide and countries where assisted suicide is legal. For instance, a 1995 Dutch study found that 948 patients who did not request suicide were killed by their doctors.
There are also innumerable problems with the legal definition of “terminal” which has allowed many patients to commit suicide who were not dying but suffering from depression.
Pro-euthanasia groups usually cite humane reasons for ending someone’s life to gain public sympathy; however, today’s palliative care is so advanced that virtually all pain can be eliminated with the proper care. Even in those cases when pain cannot be completely alleviated, it can be reduced significantly if properly treated.
People can die with dignity naturally, without having to resort to killing.
But imagine how convenient a court decision in favor of “aid in dying” could be if cost cutting is at the root of so-called health care reform!
A recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine attempts to paint dementia as a terminal disease in need of a quick resolution. This news report indicates just how skewed the thinking of these researchers is: “During the last three months of life, more than 40 percent of those with end-stage dementia underwent at least one serious medical intervention -- hospitalization, emergency department visit, IV nutrition or tube feeding.”
In other words, if certain medical “experts” can redefine comfort care such as nutrition and hydration as a “serious medical intervention” and persuade family members that their loved one is better off dying now than later, starvation can become a cause of death not seen as the cruelty that it is. Medical journal articles such as this one and court cases such as Blick v. Connecticut are paving the way for health care rationing and denial of basic comfort care, regardless of what Obama-style health care “reform” supporters are telling America. There is absolutely no doubt about it.
The recent news out of Florida unequivocally proves my point. In that state, there are plans to literally bar some patients from treatment in the event of a severe flu pandemic. The South Florida Sun Sentinel reports,
Florida health officials are drawing up guidelines that recommend barring patients with incurable cancer, end-stage multiple sclerosis and other conditions from being admitted to hospitals if the state is overwhelmed by flu cases.
The plan, which would guide Florida hospitals on how to ration scarce medical care during a severe flu outbreak, also calls for doctors to remove patients with poor prognoses from ventilators to treat those who have better chances of surviving. That decision would be made by the hospital.
The flu causes severe respiratory illnesses in a small percentage of cases, and patients who need ventilators and are deprived of them could die without the breathing assistance the machines provide.
According to this report, so far the state “has not yet publicized the guidelines or solicited input from the general public.” But something is terribly wrong when such a proposal even meets the light of day. Then again, we are living in the age of Obama-style health care rationing.
When the media and the medical professionals, not to mention politicians, talk about things such as denying nutrition, hydration and/or oxygen to certain patients, think about this man in Liverpool, England, who had suffered from stomach cancer, was starved to death in a London hospice and after his death, was found to be cancer free! The news report states,“76 year-old Jack Jones had responded successfully to chemotherapy and surgery, but died of pneumonia two weeks after doctors at the Marie Curie Hospice ordered the withdrawal of food and hydration and all medication except painkillers in accordance with what is being called in British media the ‘death pathway.’”
No wonder Mrs. Jones is suing the hospice! What would you do? Could such draconian so-called palliative care measures be adopted in the USA? Would they be deemed cost-effective?
Well, as reported recently, such atrocities already do happen here. Bill Beckman, executive director of Illinois Right to Life Committee, reported the following in his blog on September 8:
A caller from Virginia today told me how her father died prematurely when a doctor and hospice decided 89 years was enough for him, since his quality of life had declined. This case begins on a positive note. A caring doctor and nurses helped this man overcome pneumonia successfully.
He was ready to go home and the family was ready to take him home when another doctor raised the issue of food aspiration, suggesting they could not take care of him on their own. The medical basis for this concern is unclear, but it created fear that affected the family’s decisions. Even though this patient had no terminal illness, the family ultimately accepted getting hospice involved.
Hospice wanted to give the patient morphine, even though he told them he was not in pain. Family members did not allow use of morphine at that time. With severe restrictions on food and water intake by mouth, he began showing symptoms of dehydration. Rather than offering an IV or feeding tube, hospice pushed morphine as the solution. When the dehydration began causing serious external symptoms, the family gave in to allow the morphine. Between the dehydration and the morphine, the patient died rather quickly.
The doctor and hospice justified the denial of sufficient food and water as observing the patient’s durable power of attorney for health care, which indicated he did not want to be kept alive by “extraordinary means.” That generic phrase allowed this patient to be denied food and water, leading to his death, even though he had no underlying terminal illness or condition.
Such anecdotal cases, coupled with public comments by political operatives such as Reich and state government proposals such as that of Florida, invite a second look at current discussions about “scarce medical resources” and “cost cutting.” Political considerations in life-and-death matters must not be based on the cruel proposition that one may save money at the expense of human lives.
This was the message of parents of children with disabilities who gathered with members of Congress on Capitol Hill recently. At their press conference, Congressman Trent Franks, whose deceased brother had Down syndrome, said, “A society is measured by how it cares for those who are down, in the shadows and in the twilight of death. Those in the shadows have the greatest things to say and God’s greatest gift is given to them.”
America’s response to the elderly, the terminally ill and the vulnerable must not be starvation, dehydration, suffocation or denial of basic, humane comfort care. But lest we forget, Taylor Caldwell’s fictional Lucifer reminds us, “Evil is madness and has no pity, and therefore it is confusion thrice compounded. Evil men possess no wits. They are easily led to believe what they wish to believe.”
You've lost this one, dear Judie. Praise God for a strong and intelligent conference of U.S. bishops to keep all of us thinking clearly in the midst of so many naysayers and promoters of fear and downright incorrect information. Roger M. | October 21, 2009
Judy - The only point I wish to question is the criticism of the Florida guidelines about prioritization of treatment during an emergency. What is it you would alternately do, not plan at all? Not having a plan at all will only lead to chaos and more death. A plan that seeks to spread resources evenly regardless of the prognosis will only treat everyone inadequately and not minimize mortality. Alternatively, a plan that "does the best" for the first to arrive is unfair in that it will ensure that little or nothing is available for the many more that arrive later. Keep in mind that the Florida guidelines are for EMERGENCY DISASTER planning, not the normal healthcare situation. When faced with inadequate resources createded by sudden, cataclysmic circmstances, I ask, "What would you do?" There is no easy or perfect answer. So we must strive to find a good, practical plan that maximizes life, not a philosophical response. Petra Spahr | October 22, 2009
Dear Roger
The Conference of Catholic Bishops is not thinking clearly and that's the problem. This is not about proper politics in a polite society; it is about protecting human rights and the family.
The is no incorrect information in my commentary or on this website. Read the bills -- all five versions.
Judie Brown Judie Brown | October 23, 2009
Dear Petra
The problem with determining ahead of time that a policy is in place to deny treatment, thus performing passive euthanasia, is that alternatives to such a draconian measure should be examined and before a finalized policy is put in place, all avenues should be examined. This is why the Florida policy is now open for public comment.
Planning is a great idea; planning to kill is not.
SO YOU THINK YOU ARE A REAL MAN? Posted: Tuesday October 20, 2009 at 1:22 pm EST by Judie Brown
Michael Kimmel is touted as a leading authority on men and their masculinity, so I was a bit taken aback when Feministing.com published an interview with him. Then, as I read the interview, I had to ask myself what sort of masculinity Kimmel’s expertise addresses.
In the interview, Kimmel's 10-year-old son is described as a "budding male feminist." Kimmel also talks about his younger days, when he and his female “partner” collaborated due to her inability to drive a stick-shift car, which happened to be their only mode of transportation. Since she worked with victims of domestic violence, Kimmel drove these women to shelters, and during those trips, he learned a bit about abusive males. I find it commendable for any man to reach out to assist women in a time of trial and learn from their experiences, as Kimmel apparently did. But somewhere between the abused females and the 2009 interview, Kimmel’s perception of real men went awry.
When asked who his heroines are, Kimmel named Gloria Steinem,
because she's been the figurehead for American feminism for fifty years. But also because of her unbelievable grace in the kind of vilification that she's gotten from the right and from anti-feminists over those fifty years. She's an amazingly gracious and emotionally available person, and she's deeply respectful of women, so I've always admired her.
A bit later in the interview, Kimmel added what I believe is the crux of his male thinking:
It is sort of weird and a bit discomforting for me to offer advice to feminists as a group, being a man, but what I would say is that the group that feels that it has nothing to gain from feminism, and that feminism has nothing to do with them, is men. And I think that that's the reason that women are faced with such draconian choices between opting out and balancing work and family, because men haven't stepped up and aren't doing as much housework and childcare as women need them to do in order for women to be able to balance work and family. And my argument here is that the group that has to be embraced by feminism is men — although, I hasten to add that it's not your job. That should be our job. We should be doing that.
The biggest mistake we make is to assume — and men often think this — that gender equality is a zero-sum game. That if women win, then men are going to lose. And I think what we have to do is to show people that feminism is a win-win. I think we can do that at the personal level in terms of the quality of our relationships with our children, our partners and our friends, and also in terms of public policy.
Perhaps Kimmel needs to step back for a time and study his views in light of what Gloria Steinem and her ilk really believe about men. The history of Steinem’s involvement in advancing the contraceptive mentality versus the ability of real men to step up and do the very things that he claims men don’t do enough of may deep-six his defense of the feminist male. He may find that his perspective on what it takes to be a “real man” is slightly askew, especially since his heroine likes the idea that the feminist movement has literally feminized the male.
As a grandmother, I have had experience with three amazing men in my life: my husband, my son and my son-in-law. Each of them is what I would call a man’s man. Each is a wonderful, caring husband and an excellent father. All three of these men have characteristics in common that Kimmel may have overlooked in his pursuit of male feminism.
These three men are devoted to being father figures in the home and have made it possible for their wives to feel secure in their roles as wives and mothers. They represent three very human, imperfect but genuine examples of how men can and do respond to God’s call to the vocation of husband and father, and the responsibilities attendant to that task. Kimmel never mentions men such as these.
There are a lot of additional things Kimmel overlooks. For example, his heroine Gloria Steinem once said, “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.” Comments like this are degrading to women and certainly do not enhance the once-respected female characteristic of femininity.
In response to a question asked of her in 1996 about her position on such things as abortion, Steinem opined,
I do think "pro-abortion" was the wrong term--since everyone would like to reduce the necessity of abortion. I prefer reproductive freedom--the freedom to have as well as not to have children.
I appreciate the openness of spirit in your question. I hope that you would support my choice, as well as your own. And in any case, we could work together for contraception and sex education that would diminish the necessity of abortion.
The point of bringing up a couple of Steinem’s comments is that such views play directly into the stereotypical feminist ideology that Kimmel apparently believes men need to embrace. To my mind, such thinking is not only destructive to the true male identity, but contradictory to the images of manhood that many Christians hold dear.
But there I go again, right? Talking about God when the audience that would listen to a Steinem or a Kimmel might not be interested in what God has to say. Regardless, here are some facts that even those who prefer agnosticism to Christianity might find worthy of further thought and study.
Contrary to Kimmel, writer/researcher Mark Wegierski commented in “The decline of the gentleman in late modernity,”
Current-day, hypermodern societies, such as the U.S., Canada, Britain, and northwestern Europe — countries which were formerly among the world's bastions of gentility — now have a hostile outlook and inherent bias against the traditional gentleman, or the man of manners and genuine cultivation. As a result, the general moral tenor, as well as the stability of family life in those societies, has been further undermined.
This decline in gentility (respectful, moral conduct) among members of the male sex contributes to disrespect toward women and their femininity. Any time a man can take advantage of a woman and be “protected” from fatherhood, sociological damage to the human family is going to occur. Everything, including sexual relations, has to be tempered with moderation and respect. When it isn't, horrors such as domestic violence occur at an increased rate.
As we know from government-generated statistical reports, the increase in popularity of contraception, compounded by surgical abortion as a backup, has contributed not only to the dehumanization of the preborn child but to the mothers carrying those children.
Dr. Evelyn L. Billings, one of the world’s foremost authorities on natural family planning, appears to truly understand the meaning of being a “real man” when she writes, ironically, on “Womanhood”:
Physically a woman is specially endowed to conceive, to give birth and nurture a child. …These physical components of her femininity are fused undeniably with her feminine nature which instinctively accepts the child and the protective role. In order to fulfill this role she seeks security, fidelity, protection and harmony in her male partner, requiring and demanding his selfless love. To be wanted, loved and challenged by a woman whose needs for herself and child are great, challenges and enhances his masculinity. This enables him to exercise his male role and express his male strength and tender love. Her demands are essential for him to realize his maleness.
While some might choose to overlook the negatives created culturally, sociologically and medically by overemphasis on contraception and abortion (two topics Kimmel avoided), the facts are building every day in the case for a return to gentility.
Registered nurse Jenn Giroux pointed out in the Cincinnati Enquirer, “I have seen the physical, mental, psychological, and spiritual damage done to women from abortion and contraception.” She attributes the rise in divorce rates, sexually transmitted diseases and sterility to the practice of contraception and rightfully suggests that women deserve the truth. I would add that men interested in becoming feminists also need to study the facts.
In case Kimmel is searching for additional evidence, we have learned that contraceptives are polluting our water systems and may be contributing to male fertility problems. Not only that, but horror of horrors, scientists are now saying that hormones in birth control pills suppress a woman’s interest in masculine men and actually "make boyish men more attractive."
Could this mean that Kimmel’s wishes are coming true? Will men devolve into some type of androgynous creature that can appear either male or female so as to placate the desires of a particular female on steroids?
As outlandish as this may sound, we don’t manufacture the news; we just make sure people are aware, so that they don’t make life-changing decisions in a vacuum. Since Kimmel's son is only 10 right now, perhaps Kimmel should do a little more research before he finalizes his opinions about what it takes to be a “real man.”
Now, with an accommodation announced for receiving Anglicans back into the Catholic Church, we need American bishops to enforce canon law. As is, with pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians proliferating, it is questionable what Faith these Anglicans will be returning to. David Volk | October 20, 2009
Dear Judie,
Thank you for telling it like it is. Gentility in men seems to have evaporated from the earth, and as much as the pill has contributed to it, the feminist women themselves have caused men to cower into wimps , like whipped dogs, who follow their wives as they dictate and determine the worldview for their lives and families. The lack of "real men" is also an indication that men have turned from God, and His commandments. Man was made in the image of God, and the glory of man is in his obedience to, and devotion to his Lord and Creator.
Our Godless society has created a whole generation of self-centered nutered males, who will deny their own consciences, to go along with the "modern woman's will" and her insatiatable lust for power. The result is what we have today, cowering wimps who push the stroller, change the daipers, and bow down to their wives rather than their God.
How is a Godly young woman to even find a Godly husband in these times? People must wake up to the lies sold to them by feminists, working as a channel for Satan and his demonic realm. Mankind and womankind have become disgusting, shallow, and filthy as they act out the whims of he who seeks to destroy thier souls. Gays and feminists wallow in their own lusts and self-love, while their immortal souls are destroyed in the process, not to mention their bodies.
Thank God, people like you, speak out while we still have the freedom to speak. Our society has been royally Duped by the feminist movement and the media. Television, movies, the music industry have all " normalized" sin to the point that the current generation thinks that people always have behaved this way. Nothing could be further from the truth. I shudder to think of what our government will endorse in the next five to ten years.
Real men will be persecuted for their belief in God. They will be condemned for supporting and caring for their wives and children. Godly women will be scorned for not stooping to the level of their peers. Girls who are pure and modest are scorned already. My own daughters are looked at like freaks, because they don't dress like prostitutes.
Men will only become men again if women draw out of them gentility. A man left to himself and his lower fallen nature, is not much better than a beast, as we can see in our society today. Women have ALWAYS had the power to determine how the society goes. Women were given by God the power to determine the future, according to how they themselves behaved, and whether or not they raised their children up to know God.
What a trick the devil has played on us, and in our pride, we were too blind to see. He whispered to Eve, "You will become like Gods." Women have become like gods, and the evil one working through them and their passions, and lust for power, has caused the downfall of millions, the loss of millions of children, and even more billions of souls.
May God bless you, and your ministry for Chirist.
sincerely in Christ,
Seraphima Smalley
Orthodox Christian,
and mother of 12 Seraphima Smalley | October 21, 2009
Do you have a citation for this study, so I can check it out? "In case Kimmel is searching for additional evidence, we have learned that contraceptives are polluting our water systems and may be contributing to male fertility problems. Not only that, but horror of horrors, scientists are now saying that hormones in birth control pills suppress a woman???s interest in masculine men and actually "make boyish men more attractive."" Charles Dabkowski | October 21, 2009
Dear Charles,
Sorry that link failed to to make into the web version. Here is the proper location of the information:
The various studes are noted here http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/1350/36/
Individual links: University of Colorado study: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6436617/
Washington state study: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/124939_estrogen04.html
Society of Catholic Social Scientists comments:
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/3151 and
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56623
A REVIEW OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINICAL TRIALS Posted: Monday October 19, 2009 at 4:39 pm EST by Judie Brown
By Jim Sedlak
Last year, we brought you the story of Planned Parenthood’s involvement in clinical trials as a way to increase its professional identity and increase its income. We have recently completed a review of the government database on clinical trials and found 33 of them that involved Planned Parenthood.
Presented below is a great deal of detail on the various trials involving Planned Parenthood. We do not expect you to be interested in all this detail, but are presenting it to you so that …
... You will get a sense of the scope of Planned Parenthood’s involvement.
... You will have the data to understand that Planned Parenthood is not just another organization doing abortions and other procedures, but it is intimately involved in creating and evaluating techniques, and finding ever more “efficient” ways of killing babies.
... You will understand how much of Planned Parenthood’s efforts involve underage girls and how much its activities in this area are funded by our own government agencies.
... You will be able to talk to your elected officials and make them understand just how much federal agencies are involved with Planned Parenthood and how shutting off Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer money is much more than stopping Title X funds.
A total of 28 Planned Parenthood affiliates were involved in these trials, and many of the affiliates were involved in more than one trial.
Trials on Underage Girls
Of particular interest were the 10 trials (30 percent) that involved girls under the age of 18. Of those trials, one was on girls as young as 13; three more involved girls as young as 14; another five are on girls as young as 15; and the 10th trial involves girls as young as 16.
As you read the information below, please remember that, in most states, minor girls being involved in sexual activity is considered sexual abuse and is illegal.
The Planned Parenthood affiliates doing the clinical trials with minor children include Planned Parenthood of Georgia, Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina, Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Planned Parenthood of Maryland, Planned Parenthood of Shasta-Diablo, Planned Parenthood Golden Gate, Virginia League of Planned Parenthood, Planned Parenthood of New York City, and Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas.
These trials involve a number of different programs and products. Here are the details of the 10 trials on underage girls:
1. Two of the trials are specifically aimed at getting these minor girls to take their birth control more consistently by sending them text messages reminding them to take their pills.
a. One of those trials is sponsored by Columbia University and is aimed at New York City girls as young as 15.
b. The second one is sponsored by “an anonymous foundation” and has the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts determining whether there is increased oral contraceptive pill adherence in girls as young as 14 who receive daily text-messaging reminders to take their OCP.
2. Emory University is a sponsor of three of the clinical trials, all involving underage African-American girls.
a. Emory and pharmaceutical company Merck are conducting a trial with Planned Parenthood of Georgia to increase the use of its Gardasil shot among 13- to 17-year-old African-American girls.
b. Emory and the National Institutes of Health are conducting a trial with Planned Parenthood of Georgia to develop and test a culturally and gender-appropriate (African-American girls) sexual health education program designed to promote long-term maintenance of HIV preventive sexual behaviors over a long follow-up period. Girls as young as 14 are participating in this trial.
c. Emory and the National Institutes of Health are also conducting another trial with Planned Parenthood of Georgia to study the efficacy of a multi-session HIV prevention program (HORIZONS HIV) for African-American female teens. This completed trial accepted girls as young as 15.
3. Planned Parenthood Mar Monte in California and Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina are involved in clinical trials to increase the use of emergency contraception among sexually active girls aged 14- to 24-years-old. The trials are being sponsored by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
4. Planned Parenthood in Maryland is involved in a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development clinical trial to study the risk of Chlamydia and gonorrhea in children as young as 15.
5. Two Planned Parenthood California affiliates (Planned Parenthood Shasta Diablo and Planned Parenthood Golden Gate) are conducting trials sponsored by the University of California at San Francisco and the National Institutes of Health. The purpose of these trials is to examine “such things as the relationship between partnerships, parental and peer influences, and contraceptive choice; factors associated with long term continuation of contraceptive methods; attributes of new hormonal contraceptive associated with user satisfaction and long-term continuation; and the extent to which high-risk women who use these methods are also condom users and determine the characteristics of these users.” These trials are accepting girls as young as 15.
6. The Virginia League of Planned Parenthood is involved in a clinical trial to get girls as young as 15 to use a “quick start” method of using the NuvaRing in adolescents. The trial is sponsored by Bayer, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Virginia Commonwealth University.
7. Planned Parenthood of Houston, Texas, is one of 120 various locations where KV Pharmaceutical is conducting clinical trials of a new vaginal infection drug. The trial includes girls as young as 16.
Trials involving medical abortion techniques
Planned Parenthood, operator of the nation’s largest abortion chain, is involved in trials involving medical abortion techniques.
1. Planned Parenthood of Waco, Texas, is involved in a trial, paid for by Gynuity Health Projects, on changing the way misoprostol is given to a woman after she has been given methotrexate to start a medical abortion. The FDA-approved procedure is that misoprostol should be given vaginally in the office. At Planned Parenthood today, women are routinely told to take it orally at home. This trial is to test giving it to women buccally (a drug delivery method where the drug is administered in the mouth, not by swallowing but by absorption through the skin of the cheek; often by placing between the top gum and the inside of the lip).
2. Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts and the Society for Family Planning are involved in a trial on the effectiveness of buccally administered misoprostol instead of a Dilapan-S rod placed three to four hours before a dilation and evacuation abortion.
3. Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Planned Parenthood of New York City are both involved in a trial funded by Gynuity Health Projects, and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation to “investigate the possibility that medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol can be administered in a manner that is simpler and less costly than that routinely employed [no sonogram and only one visit] in the United States.”
Trials involving birth control techniques
Planned Parenthood distributes birth control at over 800 facilities across the country. It is involved in a number of clinical trials concerning emergency contraception and the delivery of birth control shots.
1. Planned Parenthood in Utah is conducting a trial funded by the University of Utah and an anonymous foundation. The stated purpose of the trial is “to see if women presenting for emergency contraception are willing to accept the copper intrauterine device.” This will be accomplished by offering all women who present for EC at participating Planned Parenthood Utah clinics during the study period the option of having the copper IUD or Plan B. Women who agree to the study will be followed for six months.
2. Planned Parenthood in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, is running two trials:
a. The first is funded by Pfizer, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill and Planned Parenthood Federation of America. The purpose of the trial is to train women to self-administer Depo-Provera shots at home.
b. The second is also funded by Pfizer. The purpose of this study is to see if it is feasible to have women receive their second and third birth control injection (with Depo-Provera) at a pharmacy, compared with receiving it at a Planned Parenthood clinic.
Trials on Pain Reduction
It appears clear that if you are a Planned Parenthood insider and you want to send would-be trials on pain management to one of your affiliates, there is only one natural choice: Planned Parenthood of Columbia-Willamette in Portland, Oregon. This affiliate is involved in more clinical trials (six) than any other Planned Parenthood affiliate. Five of the six are about pain. The six trials are as follows:
1. Reducing pain during a first-trimester abortion through an intrauterine lidocaine (a numbing medication) infusion. The trial was sponsored by the Oregon Health and Science University. This trial was completed in 2004.
2. Another clinical trial sponsored by Oregon Health and Science University examines the effect of lidocaine inside the uterus on patient pain during an early abortion, compared to the paracervical block (lidocaine injected on either side of the cervix). This began in 2007.
3. In 2008, a trial studied the analgesic effects of combined ketorolac and lidocaine in a paracervical block during an abortion. This trial was sponsored by Johns Hopkins. The trial is also being conducted at Planned Parenthood of Maryland’s Baltimore clinic.
4. Another trial on the use of lidocaine to reduce pain began in 2007. This one was directed at the pain subjects experience during and after Essure transcervical tubal sterilization. Again, the sponsor of this trial was the Oregon Health and Science University.
5. Reducing the pain of IUD insertion by using misoprostol (a medication that softens the cervix) before placing an IUD. The trial is sponsored by the Oregon Health and Science University.
6. To assess the safety and efficacy of a new emergency contraceptive called Ella. Ella is designed to “prevent pregnancy” when taken three to five days after unprotected sexual intercourse. The trial is sponsored by HRA Pharma and is also being done at 15 other Planned Parenthood clinics. HRA Pharma reportedly expects to launch Ella in 2009.
In addition to these trials at Planned Parenthood in Oregon,
1. The Planned Parenthood affiliate in San Diego completed a trial in 2008 that examined how best to control the pain of a first-trimester suction curettage abortion. That trial was sponsored by the University of California at San Diego.
2. The Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts conducted a clinical trial sponsored by an anonymous foundation “to determine the equivalency of oral conscious sedation and intravenous conscious sedation for first trimester surgical abortion.” The clinical trial system indicates this trial was terminated prior to completion.
HIV/AIDS-related trials
In addition to the two studies mentioned above on underage African-American girls, Planned Parenthood was involved in other HIV/AIDS-related trials. While reading the descriptions below, it is important to remember that Planned Parenthood’s biggest product is birth control pills. It has been known for decades that women on the pill are more susceptible to AIDS/HIV than those not on the pill. If Planned Parenthood was really interested in preventing AIDS, it would get all its customers off the pill.
1. Planned Parenthood of El Paso, Texas, was where to go to when you wanted to conduct research on Hispanic men and women with HIV. This affiliate went out of business in June 2009 and was
a. Conducting a trial sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals to give the investigational drug Tipranavir for HIV-infected adult patients with no other treatment options.
b. Involved with a trial sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb to study the treatment of HIV infections. Specifically, it sought to “find out the frequency of the I50L substitution among patients experiencing treatment failure on an atazanavir-containing regimen.”
c. Conducting a trial sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on how to teach HIV prevention techniques to Hispanic men.
2. Planned Parenthood of New York City is participating in a trial sponsored by the New York Academy of Medicine to determine “what programmatic approaches effectively address two of the most difficult hurdles in HIV health services delivery: (1) getting people who would benefit from health care to use it and (2) getting people who do use health care to do so more consistently and effectively.”
Conclusion
As Planned Parenthood continues to spread its tentacles throughout our country’s health care establishment, it is imperative that they be met with resistance at every turn. We encourage everyone who lives in the areas serviced by the Planned Parenthood affiliates mentioned in this report to launch educational campaigns against Planned Parenthood.
We, at American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood project, stand ready to assist you in all phases of your efforts against Planned Parenthood. Feel free to contact us by mail at STOPP, P.O. Box 1350, Stafford, VA 22555; by phone at 540-659-4171; or by e-mail at stopp@all.org.
Jim Sedlak is vice president of American Life League, a recognized expert on Planned Parenthood and the managing editor of the Wednesday STOPP Report, STOPP’s weekly e-newsletter. This article was published on September 30 of this year and is also available online as a pdf file.
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.
Video Story: Dr. Paul Carpentier
Certified by the American Academy of FertilityCare Professionals, presents healthy alternatives to the birth control pill.
Pro-Life Story: The Killing Fields of America Posted By Donna Garner on Dec, 12 2006 On Friday, December 8, 2006, I stepped into the "Killing Fields" of America at 1927 Columbus Avenue, Waco, Texas: an abortuary called Planned Parenthood (PP). I could not help ... Read
