Sigh: ”President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.
Obama says we should do all we can to eliminate the need for abortions, then institutes policy to hand our tax dollars out in support of it. We knew he’d say anything to get elected. The people who voted for him aren’t important to him now. Ironic, considering…
President Bush has proclaimed tomorrow “National Sanctity of Human Life Day” in the United States. Please say some extra prayers for all human beings, from conception to natural death, and pray for a conversion of those who do not recognize the sanctity of human life.
40 Days for Life will be holding teleconference next Tuesday night at 9pm Eastern. Make sure to register here.
In the last 40 Days for Life campaign (just before the election), at least 614 lives were saved and 8 abortion workers quit their jobs and got out of the abortion business. Please continue to pray, fast, and partake in pro-life activities when you can. Lives depend on us.
I have often pointed out that my own position on abortion — to be against it — is actually a scientific one. I do regard, as any true Catholic does, the Holy See, Sacred Scripture, and Sacred Tradition as authoritative. However, the case as it has been revealed to us in science is more powerful as what has been mandated by the church (something I don’t think is coincidence — God knows humans’ issues with believing that which we cannot see). Today, Lisa Miller in Newsweek reports that there was a small, but steady message coming from a seemingly strange pro-life group in response to one of her recent articles on abortion: atheists.
Just as pro-life Christians argue that life is sacred because it’s given by God, pro-life atheists insist that human life is intrinsically valuable without God’s help. “I think there is nothing beyond this life—but life in and of itself is unique and special,” explains Matt Wallace, a UPS package handler in North Carolina who started an online group for pro-life atheists in 1999.
Actually, as one of those pro-life Christians, my argument comes more from the atheistic point of view she describes. I’d even say most of the pro-life activists argue from that standpoint, too, so Miller may want to re-consider her generalizations. My strict conscience on voting, however, does come from my religion, and the authority from the Church that we should not cooperate materially with intrinsic evils or have to answer for it at the end of our life. Those are two distinct actions, though (opposing abortion and voting) — I use my vote as one of the “tools” to fight abortion and other intrinsic evil as Christians are morally obligated to do.
One of the points I think that is overlooked in this article, however, is that about the actual decision of Roe v. Wade. While Miller hits on it briefly as it relates to Christopher Hitchens, her article ignores the great number of people who don’t consider themselves pro-life or pro-choice, or even consider themselves pro-choice, yet oppose Roe v. Wade because of what it is: a poor decision made by an activist court. There is a large group of people who agree with the results brought on by Roe v. Wade who would rather see this brought about by legislation. They are, of course, unmotivated to try to bring about a change (due to indifference or actually preferring the current state of this debate), but still opposed to the decision.
All in all, there are many ways to become pro-life. Most often, without a miraculous conversion to faith, this is going to be brought about by science. Even this pro-lifer thinks that the case made by science is the most convincing (but I’m only human).
Ron Paul, ever a champion for the pro-life cause (other than throwing his political support behind candidates who couldn’t win), has a unique viewpoint, as former practioner of medicine:
As a physician who has delivered over 4,000 babies I am very disturbed by the continued efforts of those on the left to establish absolute rights to abortion. However, even more distressing is the notion that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize life-ending procedures such as abortion and embryonic stem cell research.
In addition to the news that those who will benefit from federally-funded stem cell research have seen an uptick in their financial position as a result of the election, comes news from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that many health care facilities under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church may be shut down as a result of the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” for refusal to perform abortions.
Catholic/Christian hospitals are known across the country for providing great medical care. As has been pointed out by many of the bishops, it will not be sufficient for the Church to simply sell the hospitals to those who would perform abortions. The only viable option would be to shut the Catholic hospitals down.
S.C. priest tells parishioners to abstain from communion if they voted for Obama: A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him “constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil.”
Amen, and congratulations. People need to realize that they voted in favor of ideas worse than slavery. We need more lay people, priests, and bishops to stop worrying about offending people and tell them the truth.
Today we get a glimpse at some of the first Democratic priorities following their somewhat successful election night:
But Ms. Pelosi said Democrats could open the 111th Congress in January with efforts to adopt measures blocked by President Bush, including ones to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program and embryonic stem cell research. She said Democrats had no choice but to chart a centrist course. “The country must be governed from the middle,” she said. But Democrats on both sides of the Capitol were just beginning to digest the new faces in their expanded caucuses.
The pro-life contingent needs to start gearing up now to fight the embryonic stem cell research agenda of the left. Last night I sat in on the teleseminar put on by Fr. Frank Pavone, from Priests for Life, and it was a good post-election start for the pro-life community. It included Senator Coburn’s Chief of Staff, Michael Schwartz, who talked about the unlikeliness of a the Freedom of Choice Act passing, even with the current makeup of Washington. He said there are too many Democrats in conservative areas that have “nothing to gain” by supporting that. Still, he said, we shouldn’t be complacent. Write to your Congressional representatives and make sure they represent you well on life issues.
Speaking of the teleseminar, you can listen to a replay of it by going here:
Let’s regroup and prepare for a solid battle to protect all human life. This is one issue we don’t get a second chance on. In four years, at the rate we are going, we’ll have killed 6 million more of our own children.
Douglas Kmiec tries, today in the L.A. Post, to fleece pro-life voters by saying that because Obama hinted in the last debate that abortion should be used as a last resort that all of a sudden, because of that, he is no longer “pro-choice” and that Christian (he says Catholic) can vote for him in good conscience.
So can Catholics vote for a pro-choice candidate? The answer is yes, but as I found when I publicly endorsed Obama, you’ve then got “some ‘splain’n’ to do.” It’s a matter of conscience, but had Obama proclaimed himself to be pro-choice and said nothing more, it would have been problematic. But there are those additional words about appropriate education as well as adoption and assistance for mothers who choose to keep their baby.
Um, excuse me, but we aren’t stupid. Obama never, either, denounced abortion as something that is evil and is always wrong. He even said “we are going to disagree” when McCain had already spoken to the fact that abortion is wrong, and surely he didn’t expect that McCain disagreed with the assertion that we should do all we morally can to eliminate unwanted pregnancies (as in education, adoption, etc.). Clearly his point about disagreeing had to do with the fact that he thinks it is a mother’s choice to kill her child while McCain does not.
Some might ask, isn’t John McCain, the self-proclaimed “pro-lifer,” still a morally superior choice for Catholics? Not necessarily. McCain’s commitment, as he stressed in the debate, is to try to reverse Roe vs. Wade. But Republicans have been after this for decades, and the effort has not saved a single child. Even if Roe were reversed — unlikely, in my judgment — it merely transfers the question to the states, most of which are not expected to ban abortion. A Catholic serious about preserving life could reasonably find Obama’s educational and material assistance to mothers the practical, stronger alternative.
The fact of the matter is that regardless of what money is spent on anyone, and as it turns out McCain is much more charitable when it comes to these issues, the act of killing an innocent life is what is wrong. We can debate until our faces are blue about how best to support those who are going to carry out unwanted pregnancies as well as how we should go about preventing them, but that is totally immaterial in the argument of whether abortion is right or wrong and who you can vote on if you are rightly aimed and that is your strongest conviction. That part of the debate is not a moral issue on the same playing field as life and death. And, in case you didn’t notice, sir, the voter is completely at the mercy of the Supreme Court on this issue, one that should be decided by legislation from *elected* officials. Yes, we would have many more battles to come, us pro-lifers, after the decision was overturned. Many states would be legislating to legalize abortion immediately. However, at least our elected officials are accountable to us. Our SCOTUS justices are not. That should scare pro-lifers as well as the pro-death contingent (because how do you know what issue will be held hostage next?).
Catholics know how to pick presidents. In the last nine presidential contests, Catholics have been with the popular vote-getter every time. Where are the Catholics lining up in 2008? A recent Zogby poll has the national Catholic vote as a dead heat within the margin of error. If Catholic past is prologue, this election will be far closer than general polling suggests, and Obama’s few additional words in the final debate may prove to be his political salvation.
Obama’s words did nothing for any of us pro-lifers, and Mr. Kmiec’s words are even more outrageous. We aren’t stupid, and we will be turning out on November 4th to vote for John McCain.