Symptom of the Disease: Tax dollars indirectly used for abortions

Charmaine Yoest has an interesting post about the Capps Amendment designed to set up accounting mechanisms to ensure tax dollars do not directly fund abortions. An accounting mechanism? The problem is that direct funding may be blocked, but there is no way to ensure indirect funding is not used for abortions. This is another example of a symptom of the disease.

Read more

40 Days For Life

We’re about half way through the Catholic Church’s “40 Days For Life” event. Around the world people are praying and fasting for the unborn children and their mothers. It’s important to know this 40 days program is a peaceful time of prayer. No mothers are confronted, only reminded by the presence of people like you see here in downtown Hartford that these mothers do indeed have a choice.

40 days

That, in fact, is the subject of my interview with a dynamic guy, Mike Klinger, who represents the Wetherfield, CT Knights of Columbus. He and his friend Dan and two other women stood in the rain yesterday praying and holding their sign.


Listen to what Mike has to say about whether this quiet protest makes a difference … and listen to what he says to men everywhere. It is a powerful interview at the end!


For more information on the 40 days program please click here. And for more information on the Knights of Columbus in Wethersfield, click here.

Symptom of the Disease: Federal funding of abortion (5)

Back in April during budget votes, Senate Democrats and a few Republicans got together to block an amendment to the main budget bill to ensure health care providers would not be forced to abort babies and violate their moral and religious convictions. What do you think about taxpayer funded abortion in upcoming health care legislation?

Read more

Obama outraged about pro-choice doctor’s murder, saddened by terrorist attack on recruiters

Maybe some of us are being too picky about the different ways that President Obama responded to two tragic events during the last week. You can decide for yourself.

Read more

Standing on principle

Not much to say here other than a note to our Congresspeople. This is what is called principle, core, a belief system. Read and learn.

Mary Ann Glendon has announced that she will not accept the Laetare Medal– the highest honor conferred by the University of Notre Dame– at this year’s commencement exercises.

Glendon– the Harvard Law professor who recently stepped down from her post as US ambassador to the Holy See– has indicated that she decided to decline the Laetare Medal because of her concerns about the commencement address that will be delivered by President Barack Obama. In an April 27 letter to Father John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame, she wrote that a prospect “that once seemed so delightful has been complicated” by the Obama appearance and by Notre Dame’s response to criticism from the American bishops.

Editorial: A note to those of you who may not understand why she would take this stand and why I blog so frequyently on this. We believe that life begins at conception and as such we believe that this is not a Republican or conservative stance, a political stance, but a moral one and as such cannot be compromised. We see it not so much a defense of life position but defense of a helpless and defenseless human being. For some of you, that it is difficult to understand I know. For others, it is a stance sure to drive you away. But I and others have little choice. We either belive or we don’t and if we do, then it is incumbant upon us to speak up, never to berate or condemn the opinion of others, but rather to change the opinion of others so that we create a culture of life across the spectrum of humnanity allowing people to change thier outlook and attitude toward life.

I cannot speak for others, only myself. Changing laws does little to change attitude. It only drives people into the underground. It is my hope that attitudes on both sides of this argument will change so that those who are pro choice will come to naturally choose life and those who call themselves prolife will understand that the argument does not end in Congress but only when there is a full acceptance and understanding of those who may find themselves having to deal with what they might consider to be a very difficult and very personal matter.

Unless those who are prolife extend themselves in a truly loving way to help, until attitudes about pregnancy are changed in society and until we all come to truly accept pregnancy as life and not a political football, no change in law, no legislation, no edict will end the practice of terminating a life. It will only force women to hide in shame or worse … react in defiance, dangerous for the mother and child.

As Mother Theresa often said, here more than anywhere else. love is the answer. It is.

Abortion Is A Blessing

This is from Via Media (via HotAir) and I find it appalling and disgusting that a minister of Christ could ever say this much less think this. This quote comes from the new Dean of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Katherine Ragsdale. Read it first and I will deconstruct later.

And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.

I can assure you she does not speak for God or for her faith. At least I hope not for her faith. The fallacy, dare I say heresy, can be found in the last sentence.

The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.”

The Lord has taught us that love is the answer to any moral question in our lives. Selfless love, not selfish love. Respect for life from conception to its natural end is central to Christ’s message. But beyond that, to even think that it is Christlike, or to claim that God would approve of putting, not just one’s self interest, but material interests ahead of the sacred life of an innocent is beyond comprehension. No person of God would ever make such an argument.

It is one thing to say that you believe abortion is a personal choice. It is quite another to lay it all at God’s table. I wish her well but I would not listen to a single thought of hers on theology. She speaks not the word of God, I can assure you.

Donahue to Catholic Church: If only you were pro choice …

… then you surely would have more members. This is the kind of tripe Phil Donahue serves up these days.

Fox brought Phil on to debate Father Jonathan Morris on President Obama speaking at America’s premier Catholic University, Notre Dame (sorry BC). But Phil didn’t want to talk about why a Catholic college would honor a man who has no respect for a child at any point in the womb (and in some cases just outside).

Instead you will notice he never addresses that. Phil wanted to argue the Church itself. .It’s a 3 and a half minute whimper on his divorce, why he can’t go to communion, why the church is out of date and why it would have so many more members if it was just a little more hip. Blah, blah, blah.


If it’s members you’re looking for … why stop there? My guess is if the Church dropped that crazy stance on adultery, theft and coveting your neighbor’s stuff, and maybe even dropped that silly attend church on Sunday thing … wow then you might really have something.

Catholic Complacency and the 2008 Election

This is the post I read on the air today. Ed Morrissey brings the Archbishop’s Speech to a wider audience … and the questions he addresses will make some Catholics and other people of religion, more than uncomfortable.

Archbishop of Denver Charles J. Chaput delivered a speech on Saturday reflecting on the significance of the November 2008 election. Warning that media “narratives” should not obscure truth, he blamed the indifference and complacency of many U.S. Catholics for the country’s failures on abortion, poverty and immigration issues.

It’s a hard hitting no nonsense speech and whether you are Catholic or not you will find it more than enlightening … in light of the results of the 2008 election and how “Catholics” cast their vote.

and here’s what I had to say on the subject today. Click here.

Contraception and abortion needed to … reduce global warming?

Jonathon Porritt, the chairman of a government watchdog group on environmental issues, is insistent contraception and abortion be the centerpiece of the fight against global warming.

Not windmills. Not batteries. Not solar. Not alternatives. Cutting population growth should be the centerpiece through contraception and abortion through government regulation.

Porritt is chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission whose members report directly to the prime minister. Porritt is also an adviser to the royal family and an patron of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), who notes on their home page they are opposed to any form of coercion in family planning.

The also state…

The Optimum Population Trust believes that Earth may not be able to support more than half its present numbers before the end of this century, and that the UK’s long-term sustainable population level may be lower than 30 million.

The population of the UK is currently about 61 million people. They think we need to “remove” half of the entire population within 92 years? Wow, they certainly may be against coercion in family planning, but my guess is they don’t have any issues with brain washing.

Since organizations like the Sustainable Development Commission and OPT work directly with the UK government, I’m wondering if they have gotten into the school system yet? Are teachers members and supporters of the OPT? When will we see literature from the OPT specifically designed for kids?

The Sunday Times has quotes from Porritt’s concerning a report to be released soon.

Couples who have more than two children are being “irresponsible” by creating an unbearable burden on the environment, the government’s green adviser has warned.

Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the government’s Sustainable Development Commission, says curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming. He says political leaders and green campaigners should stop dodging the issue of environmental harm caused by an expanding population. …

“I think we will work our way towards a position that says that having more than two children is irresponsible. It is the ghost at the table. We have all these big issues that everybody is looking at and then you don’t really hear anyone say the “p” word.” …

Porritt, a former chairman of the Green party, says the government must improve family planning, even if it means shifting money from curing illness to increasing contraception and abortion.

He said: “We still have one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in Europe and we still have relatively high levels of pregnancies going to birth, often among women who are not convinced they want to become mothers.

I’m perfectly fine with families making their own decisions about how many children they want to have. Those decisions should be made after reviewing many factors including what is affordable, and yes, the impact on the environment.

The problem is that the information is not being based on facts. Global warming – re-branded as climate change – is the new religion after all. We’re brainwashing people. There is no consensus in science.

Liberalism and socialism is actually a driving force in all of this. If the government keeps bailing out everyone and continues down the path to provide health care, education, pre-school, breakfast, lunch,housing for families, and everything else imaginable, they will not have the reason to make their own decisions.

The government is there to support and provide of course, so why should they even care? Maybe if the government provides everything, parents would be willing to limit the number of kids they have. In turn, they loose all of their freedom.

Hat tip to Sister Toldjah for posting the link to the Times piece.