Commentary: Bainbridge: Do 'Good' Causes Always Promote Good?
From Life Matters - The Newsletter of the Respect Life Office of the Diocese of Rockford December 2005
Showing posts with label Morality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Morality. Show all posts
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
What the Pope really said about condoms
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=21465
VATICAN CITY, November 22 (CNA/EWTN News) - Pope Benedict XVI’s comments on condoms in a new book-interview have whipped the media into a frenzy.
Many reports interpreted the words as a dramatic shift from Church teaching, but experts say that nothing has changed.
On the afternoon of Nov. 20, the Vatican's semi-official newspaper L'Osservatore Romano released a series of excerpts from the new book-interview called "Light of the World: The Pope, The Church and the Signs of the Times," by the German journalist Peter Seewald.
The newspaper, jumping the scheduled world release, chose to publish only two paragraphs of what is a more extensive response from the Pope to the question of whether the use of condoms could be justified to confront the problem of AIDS transmission.
This fragmented presentation did not give a full view of the Pope's words. But it said enough to lead some international media sources to conjecture that the pontiff had made a "U-turn" on Catholic teaching against contraception.
The actual text of the Pope’s remarks extends over two full pages. It begins with interviewer Peter Seewald asking the Pope about his statement to a reporter during his March 2009 trip to Africa that condoms are not a solution to the AIDS pandemic.
The Pope responds by reaffirming his answer. “People can get condoms when they want them anyway,” the Pope told Seewald. “But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen.”
Secular thinking about AIDS involves a “fixation on the condom” that implies a trivialization of sexuality, he said. As a result, sexuality is no longer seen as “an expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves.”
The remark that caused such a stir follows this. The Pope mentioned a situation in which condom use could be positive but still an immoral act. He used the example of condom use by male prostitutes.
Pope Benedict said: “There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.”
Seewald followed this up with a question about whether the Church is “actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms.”
Pope Benedict responded, "She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality."
These words — and extremely varied interpretations given to them by commentators — have sent shock waves out from Rome to the world.
But it is apparent that the Pope’s words have been misunderstood or worse, badly distorted. While he said clearly that the use of condoms "is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection," he conceded that they could be used "in the intention of reducing the risk of infection."
Unable to wait for further explanations, the Australian daily, The Age, reported: "Pope lifts ban on condoms." This became the common theme in the reporting.
However, the Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said Nov. 21 that "the reasoning of the Pope certainly cannot be defined as a revolutionary turning point."
He said that, instead, it offers an "original contribution" and a "far-sighted vision" of taking small steps to "a more human and responsible exercise of sexuality."
Janet Smith, an ethicist at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, published a statement on the website of Ignatius Press, the English language publisher of Seewald's “Light of the World.”
She said the Pope "is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices.
The Pope, she added, is not talking about morality, but the psychological state of those who make use of condoms. "If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature.
"The Holy Father does not in any way think the use of condoms is a part of the solution to reducing the risk of AIDS. As he explicitly states, the true solution involves 'humanizing sexuality'.”
A former student of the Pope's, Father Joseph Fessio, editor-in-chief of Ignatius Press, said the Pope's comment on condoms is "very carefully qualified."
“It would be wrong to say, ‘Pope Approves Condoms'," Fr. Fessio said. "He’s saying it’s immoral, but in an individual case the use of a condom could be an awakening to someone that he’s got to be more conscious of his actions.’’
Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver, writing in “On the Square,” the blog for the magazine First Things, explained: “The Church holds that condom use is morally flawed by its nature, and that, equally important, condom use does not prevent AIDS and can actually enable its spread by creating a false sense of security.”
"In the context of the book's later discussion of contraception and Catholic teaching on sexuality, the Pope's comments are morally insightful,” Archbishop Chaput continued. “But taken out of context, they can easily be inferred as approving condoms under certain circumstances," he said.
Archbishop Chaput said the Pope’s aides should have been better prepared for the controversy over his remarks.
“One might reasonably expect the Holy Father's assistants to have an advance communications plan in place, and to involve bishops and Catholic media in a timely way to explain and defend the Holy Father's remarks,” he said. “Instead, the Vatican's own semi-official newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, violated the book's publication embargo and released excerpts of the content early. Not surprisingly, news media instantly zeroed in on the issue of condoms, and the rest of this marvelous book already seems like an afterthought.”
Seewald himself is expected to explain his viewpoint and give more context from the interview in a press conference at the Vatican on Nov. 23.
VATICAN CITY, November 22 (CNA/EWTN News) - Pope Benedict XVI’s comments on condoms in a new book-interview have whipped the media into a frenzy.
Many reports interpreted the words as a dramatic shift from Church teaching, but experts say that nothing has changed.
On the afternoon of Nov. 20, the Vatican's semi-official newspaper L'Osservatore Romano released a series of excerpts from the new book-interview called "Light of the World: The Pope, The Church and the Signs of the Times," by the German journalist Peter Seewald.
The newspaper, jumping the scheduled world release, chose to publish only two paragraphs of what is a more extensive response from the Pope to the question of whether the use of condoms could be justified to confront the problem of AIDS transmission.
This fragmented presentation did not give a full view of the Pope's words. But it said enough to lead some international media sources to conjecture that the pontiff had made a "U-turn" on Catholic teaching against contraception.
The actual text of the Pope’s remarks extends over two full pages. It begins with interviewer Peter Seewald asking the Pope about his statement to a reporter during his March 2009 trip to Africa that condoms are not a solution to the AIDS pandemic.
The Pope responds by reaffirming his answer. “People can get condoms when they want them anyway,” the Pope told Seewald. “But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen.”
Secular thinking about AIDS involves a “fixation on the condom” that implies a trivialization of sexuality, he said. As a result, sexuality is no longer seen as “an expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves.”
The remark that caused such a stir follows this. The Pope mentioned a situation in which condom use could be positive but still an immoral act. He used the example of condom use by male prostitutes.
Pope Benedict said: “There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.”
Seewald followed this up with a question about whether the Church is “actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms.”
Pope Benedict responded, "She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality."
These words — and extremely varied interpretations given to them by commentators — have sent shock waves out from Rome to the world.
But it is apparent that the Pope’s words have been misunderstood or worse, badly distorted. While he said clearly that the use of condoms "is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection," he conceded that they could be used "in the intention of reducing the risk of infection."
Unable to wait for further explanations, the Australian daily, The Age, reported: "Pope lifts ban on condoms." This became the common theme in the reporting.
However, the Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said Nov. 21 that "the reasoning of the Pope certainly cannot be defined as a revolutionary turning point."
He said that, instead, it offers an "original contribution" and a "far-sighted vision" of taking small steps to "a more human and responsible exercise of sexuality."
Janet Smith, an ethicist at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, published a statement on the website of Ignatius Press, the English language publisher of Seewald's “Light of the World.”
She said the Pope "is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices.
The Pope, she added, is not talking about morality, but the psychological state of those who make use of condoms. "If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature.
"The Holy Father does not in any way think the use of condoms is a part of the solution to reducing the risk of AIDS. As he explicitly states, the true solution involves 'humanizing sexuality'.”
A former student of the Pope's, Father Joseph Fessio, editor-in-chief of Ignatius Press, said the Pope's comment on condoms is "very carefully qualified."
“It would be wrong to say, ‘Pope Approves Condoms'," Fr. Fessio said. "He’s saying it’s immoral, but in an individual case the use of a condom could be an awakening to someone that he’s got to be more conscious of his actions.’’
Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver, writing in “On the Square,” the blog for the magazine First Things, explained: “The Church holds that condom use is morally flawed by its nature, and that, equally important, condom use does not prevent AIDS and can actually enable its spread by creating a false sense of security.”
"In the context of the book's later discussion of contraception and Catholic teaching on sexuality, the Pope's comments are morally insightful,” Archbishop Chaput continued. “But taken out of context, they can easily be inferred as approving condoms under certain circumstances," he said.
Archbishop Chaput said the Pope’s aides should have been better prepared for the controversy over his remarks.
“One might reasonably expect the Holy Father's assistants to have an advance communications plan in place, and to involve bishops and Catholic media in a timely way to explain and defend the Holy Father's remarks,” he said. “Instead, the Vatican's own semi-official newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, violated the book's publication embargo and released excerpts of the content early. Not surprisingly, news media instantly zeroed in on the issue of condoms, and the rest of this marvelous book already seems like an afterthought.”
Seewald himself is expected to explain his viewpoint and give more context from the interview in a press conference at the Vatican on Nov. 23.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
CWA Poll: Congress 2011 Needs to Focus on Economy, Jobs, Morality
New poll suggests Americans are most concerned with the decline of the economy and morality and values
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 /Christian Newswire/ -- A new poll co-commissioned by Concerned Women for America (CWA) and conducted by the polling company, inc./WomanTrend points to a huge task facing the new Congress. In a survey of 842 Americans who voted in yesterday's elections, the overwhelming majority want the government to stop spending immediately and focus on the economic decline as well as the decline of morality and values.
"As members of Congress and Republicans begin to consider their agenda for both the lame duck session of Congress and 2011 it is important to reflect upon the clear priorities of the American people and particularly American women. Both groups clearly stated in our poll that they are overwhelmingly fed up with the out-of-control government spending that has run rampant in the past two years and threatens the livelihood of many of our nation's families," said Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America. "Even voters who once supported Barack Obama have changed course and voted for fiscal and social conservatives."
Of those surveyed, 47% voted for Barack Obama and 46% voted for John McCain in the last election; 45% identified themselves as conservatives, 25% liberals and 28% moderates. When asked if the government should stop spending now or keep spending to address the needs of the current generation, 64% (61% women) of respondents said to stop government spending now in order to stop increases in the national debt.
And when asked about the most important challenges facing future generations, 75% said economic decline. Coming in at a close second at 62% (63% women) said the decline of morality and values.
"Americans want an ethical government that spends wisely and protects traditional values and morals," continued Nance. "Americans, especially women, have high expectations for the new Congress. Half of the voters yesterday went into the polls feeling concerned, while another third described themselves as frustrated - those are strong emotions that demand the country do a complete about face."
"Yesterday's wins are only a start. As Americans continue to face unemployment, declining wages, and foreclosures, the work to undo the last two years of failed policies, rampant government spending, and the legalization of taxpayer-funded abortion, begins now. Concerned Women for America is prepared to remind Washington of their campaign promises."
To speak with Penny Nance, please contact Kristina Hernandez at 703-373-0632 or khernandez@crcpublicrelations.com.
Christian Newswire
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 /Christian Newswire/ -- A new poll co-commissioned by Concerned Women for America (CWA) and conducted by the polling company, inc./WomanTrend points to a huge task facing the new Congress. In a survey of 842 Americans who voted in yesterday's elections, the overwhelming majority want the government to stop spending immediately and focus on the economic decline as well as the decline of morality and values.
"As members of Congress and Republicans begin to consider their agenda for both the lame duck session of Congress and 2011 it is important to reflect upon the clear priorities of the American people and particularly American women. Both groups clearly stated in our poll that they are overwhelmingly fed up with the out-of-control government spending that has run rampant in the past two years and threatens the livelihood of many of our nation's families," said Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America. "Even voters who once supported Barack Obama have changed course and voted for fiscal and social conservatives."
Of those surveyed, 47% voted for Barack Obama and 46% voted for John McCain in the last election; 45% identified themselves as conservatives, 25% liberals and 28% moderates. When asked if the government should stop spending now or keep spending to address the needs of the current generation, 64% (61% women) of respondents said to stop government spending now in order to stop increases in the national debt.
And when asked about the most important challenges facing future generations, 75% said economic decline. Coming in at a close second at 62% (63% women) said the decline of morality and values.
"Americans want an ethical government that spends wisely and protects traditional values and morals," continued Nance. "Americans, especially women, have high expectations for the new Congress. Half of the voters yesterday went into the polls feeling concerned, while another third described themselves as frustrated - those are strong emotions that demand the country do a complete about face."
"Yesterday's wins are only a start. As Americans continue to face unemployment, declining wages, and foreclosures, the work to undo the last two years of failed policies, rampant government spending, and the legalization of taxpayer-funded abortion, begins now. Concerned Women for America is prepared to remind Washington of their campaign promises."
To speak with Penny Nance, please contact Kristina Hernandez at 703-373-0632 or khernandez@crcpublicrelations.com.
Christian Newswire
Americans Remember Health Care Betrayal at the Polls
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 /Christian Newswire/ -- Representative Bart Stupak and the majority of his collaborators who provided the votes for the pro-abortion health care bill were sent packing as a result of voter outrage culminating in yesterday's election: Representatives Alan Mollohan, Steve Driehaus, Baron Hill, Chris Carney, Kathy Dahlkemper, Marcy Kaptur, Charlie Wilson, Brad Ellsworth, Jim Oberstar and John Boccieri. Only Representatives Marcy Kaptur, Joe Donnelly and Jerry Costello escaped voters' wrath.
"Last night's vote was crystal clear: Americans do not want their money to pay for abortions," said Concerned Women for America Director of Legislation and Public Policy Shari Rendall.
According to Concerned Women for America CEO Penny Nance, selling their votes to pass the controversial health care bill most Americans oppose was their ticket home. "Yesterday's vote showed that Americans realized that President Obama's executive order was just a sham to ram through this unpopular bill."
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
"Last night's vote was crystal clear: Americans do not want their money to pay for abortions," said Concerned Women for America Director of Legislation and Public Policy Shari Rendall.
According to Concerned Women for America CEO Penny Nance, selling their votes to pass the controversial health care bill most Americans oppose was their ticket home. "Yesterday's vote showed that Americans realized that President Obama's executive order was just a sham to ram through this unpopular bill."
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
Thursday, September 16, 2010
False 'Promises' of Destructive Embryonic Stem Cell Research Discussed in Senate Hearing
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16 /Christian Newswire/ -- This morning, the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee will hold a hearing titled "The Promise of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research."
Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America, said, "The problem with the 'promise' of destructive embryonic stem cell research is that it is simply a dead end street, especially when compared to the successes seen with adult stem cell research. Clinical trials using adult stem cells have proven far more successful and have made significant strides in treating Leukemia, brain tumors, breast cancer, anemia, and especially autoimmune diseases.
"To harvest embryos and destroy life as part of a research process that has little hope of living up to promised success is wrong.
"The Obama administration has already said they are exploring all possible avenues to make sure that they can continue funding this destructive research. President Barack Obama and Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) are determined now more than ever to push for the destruction of innocent human life for the sake of scientific study that, in fact, has very little 'promise.'"
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America, said, "The problem with the 'promise' of destructive embryonic stem cell research is that it is simply a dead end street, especially when compared to the successes seen with adult stem cell research. Clinical trials using adult stem cells have proven far more successful and have made significant strides in treating Leukemia, brain tumors, breast cancer, anemia, and especially autoimmune diseases.
"To harvest embryos and destroy life as part of a research process that has little hope of living up to promised success is wrong.
"The Obama administration has already said they are exploring all possible avenues to make sure that they can continue funding this destructive research. President Barack Obama and Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) are determined now more than ever to push for the destruction of innocent human life for the sake of scientific study that, in fact, has very little 'promise.'"
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Activist Judge Can't Wait for Docile Congress and Military to Cave in -- Orders Liberal Agenda Now
WASHINGTON, Sept. 10 /Christian Newswire/ -- A federal judge in California has ruled that the military's ban on homosexuals openly serving in the military is unconstitutional.
Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America said, "It should not be activist judges who determine what is best for our troops. This judge's ruling shows a blatant disregard for Congress and the military. It should only be at the discretion of Congress and those in military positions who are trained and competent to decide what is in the best interest of the military and what regulations are best for the readiness of our troops."
Shari Rendall, Director of Legislation and Public Policy for CWA, said, "It is appalling that during a time when this country is fighting two wars, that a hostile social agenda would distract from the most important thing we could give our troops- support in a time when military readiness should be priority."
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America said, "It should not be activist judges who determine what is best for our troops. This judge's ruling shows a blatant disregard for Congress and the military. It should only be at the discretion of Congress and those in military positions who are trained and competent to decide what is in the best interest of the military and what regulations are best for the readiness of our troops."
Shari Rendall, Director of Legislation and Public Policy for CWA, said, "It is appalling that during a time when this country is fighting two wars, that a hostile social agenda would distract from the most important thing we could give our troops- support in a time when military readiness should be priority."
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
Christian Newswire
Monday, July 19, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
National Right to Life Comments on the Nomination of Elena Kagan to U.S. Supreme Court
WASHINGTON, May 10 /Christian Newswire/ -- The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of right-to-life organizations in all 50 states, issued the following statement regarding President Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan to fill the seat on the U.S. Supreme Court that is being vacated by Justice John Paul Stevens. This statement may be attributed to NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson.
On April 21, 2010, President Obama used thinly veiled code language to communicate his clear intent to choose a nominee who would be hostile to legislative attempts to protect unborn humans. The President stated that he wanted someone "who is going to be interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account . . . women's rights," and that this was going to be "very important" to him as he viewed our "core Constitution" as protecting the "bodily integrity" of women.
In light of the President's stated intent, senators have an obligation to probe whether Elena Kagan will tolerate limits on abortion, enacted through normal democratic channels, or will seek to impose extreme pro-abortion views by judicial decree. Ms. Kagan herself argued forcefully in 1995, in a lengthy book review published in the University of Chicago Law Review, that such inquiries by senators are a legitimate and necessary part of the confirmation process.
In the most recent Supreme Court ruling dealing with abortion and the rights of unborn children, Gonzales v. Carhart, on April 18, 2007, a five-justice majority upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Yet on that occasion, four justices in dissent -- including Justice Stevens -- argued for a constitutional doctrine that would have invalidated the ban on partial-birth abortions and also, by implication, condemned virtually any other law or government policy intended to discourage abortion. If the dissenters' position became the position of the majority of the Supreme Court, various types of laws that have been deemed permissible under Roe v. Wade could be invalidated by judicial decree, perhaps including the Hyde Amendment (restricting government funding of abortion) and parental notification laws. It is appropriate and necessary for senators to inquire into whether Ms. Kagan would embrace the extreme, results-oriented doctrines enunciated by the dissenting justices in that case.
(Since the Gonzales case was decided, dissenting Justice David Souter has been replaced by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Most analysts believe that Sotomayor would be very likely to join the pro-abortion bloc when such issues are revisited in the future.)
There are troubling indications that Ms. Kagan generally favors an activist, results-oriented approach to constitutional law. For example, in her 1995 law journal article, she wrote, "The bottom-line issue in the appointments process must concern the kinds of judicial decisions that will serve the country and, correlatively, the effect the nominee will have on the Court's decisions . . . If that is too results oriented . . . so be it. . ." She also wrote that "it should be no surprise by now that many of the votes a Supreme Court Justice casts have little to do with technical legal ability and much to do with conceptions of value."
Regarding Ms. Kagan's specific views on the Court's past abortion-related rulings, there is little on the public record. But Ms. Kagan may have betrayed a possible personal animus towards the pro-life movement in a 1980 essay lamenting Republican gains in the 1980 election, in which she referred disparagingly to "victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed [candidates] . . . these avengers of 'innocent life' and the B-1 Bomber . . ." Was Ms. Kagan so dismissive of the belief that unborn children are members of the human family that she felt it necessary to put the term "innocent life" in quote marks, or does she have another explanation? Would she be able to set aside any animus she has towards those who fight to protect innocent human life, when reviewing laws duly enacted for that purpose?
The National Right to Life Committee is the nation's largest pro-life group with affiliates in all 50 states and over 3,000 local chapters nationwide. National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect those threatened by abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Christian Newswire
On April 21, 2010, President Obama used thinly veiled code language to communicate his clear intent to choose a nominee who would be hostile to legislative attempts to protect unborn humans. The President stated that he wanted someone "who is going to be interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account . . . women's rights," and that this was going to be "very important" to him as he viewed our "core Constitution" as protecting the "bodily integrity" of women.
In light of the President's stated intent, senators have an obligation to probe whether Elena Kagan will tolerate limits on abortion, enacted through normal democratic channels, or will seek to impose extreme pro-abortion views by judicial decree. Ms. Kagan herself argued forcefully in 1995, in a lengthy book review published in the University of Chicago Law Review, that such inquiries by senators are a legitimate and necessary part of the confirmation process.
In the most recent Supreme Court ruling dealing with abortion and the rights of unborn children, Gonzales v. Carhart, on April 18, 2007, a five-justice majority upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Yet on that occasion, four justices in dissent -- including Justice Stevens -- argued for a constitutional doctrine that would have invalidated the ban on partial-birth abortions and also, by implication, condemned virtually any other law or government policy intended to discourage abortion. If the dissenters' position became the position of the majority of the Supreme Court, various types of laws that have been deemed permissible under Roe v. Wade could be invalidated by judicial decree, perhaps including the Hyde Amendment (restricting government funding of abortion) and parental notification laws. It is appropriate and necessary for senators to inquire into whether Ms. Kagan would embrace the extreme, results-oriented doctrines enunciated by the dissenting justices in that case.
(Since the Gonzales case was decided, dissenting Justice David Souter has been replaced by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Most analysts believe that Sotomayor would be very likely to join the pro-abortion bloc when such issues are revisited in the future.)
There are troubling indications that Ms. Kagan generally favors an activist, results-oriented approach to constitutional law. For example, in her 1995 law journal article, she wrote, "The bottom-line issue in the appointments process must concern the kinds of judicial decisions that will serve the country and, correlatively, the effect the nominee will have on the Court's decisions . . . If that is too results oriented . . . so be it. . ." She also wrote that "it should be no surprise by now that many of the votes a Supreme Court Justice casts have little to do with technical legal ability and much to do with conceptions of value."
Regarding Ms. Kagan's specific views on the Court's past abortion-related rulings, there is little on the public record. But Ms. Kagan may have betrayed a possible personal animus towards the pro-life movement in a 1980 essay lamenting Republican gains in the 1980 election, in which she referred disparagingly to "victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed [candidates] . . . these avengers of 'innocent life' and the B-1 Bomber . . ." Was Ms. Kagan so dismissive of the belief that unborn children are members of the human family that she felt it necessary to put the term "innocent life" in quote marks, or does she have another explanation? Would she be able to set aside any animus she has towards those who fight to protect innocent human life, when reviewing laws duly enacted for that purpose?
The National Right to Life Committee is the nation's largest pro-life group with affiliates in all 50 states and over 3,000 local chapters nationwide. National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect those threatened by abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Christian Newswire
Fr. Pavone on Kagan Nomination
WASHINGTON, May 10 /Christian Newswire/ -- Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued the following statement in response to the President's anticipated announcement today of his choice for a Supreme Court nominee:
"Supreme Court Justices are not supposed to shape public policy, and their nomination and confirmation should be based on their qualifications, not their views on specific issues.
"But there are certain issues so central to the very nature and purpose of government that one's position on those issues is tantamount to a qualification for the job. The very purpose of government is the protection of human rights, starting with life. No court can legitimize an act of violence, such as abortion, or take away human rights. Anyone who fails to affirm that does not belong in any public office, much less the US Supreme Court."
Priests for Life has begun a Facebook page for people who hold the same view; see www.priestsforlife.org/facebook for details.
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
"Supreme Court Justices are not supposed to shape public policy, and their nomination and confirmation should be based on their qualifications, not their views on specific issues.
"But there are certain issues so central to the very nature and purpose of government that one's position on those issues is tantamount to a qualification for the job. The very purpose of government is the protection of human rights, starting with life. No court can legitimize an act of violence, such as abortion, or take away human rights. Anyone who fails to affirm that does not belong in any public office, much less the US Supreme Court."
Priests for Life has begun a Facebook page for people who hold the same view; see www.priestsforlife.org/facebook for details.
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
A Bishop that has a pair
Bishop Brandt Blocks Expansion Efforts of Nuns who Supported Health Bill
The Sisters of St. Joseph in Baden, Pennsylvania opposed the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops by supporting the Health Care Reform Bill. Now Bishop Lawrence E. Brandt of Greensburg has withdrawn his diocese’s support for their community by prohibiting the use of any diocesan media or parishes in their recruitment efforts.
“He has the right to disapprove a request from a religious community that wants to host a recruitment event when that community has taken a public stance in opposition to the Church’s teaching on human life,” said diocesan spokesman Jerry Zufelt.
“Furthermore an environment of dissent and public opposition to the positions of the U.S. Catholic bishops does not provide an appropriate seedbed for vocations.”
The Sisters of St. Joseph had signed a letter written by NETWORK, a Catholic “social justice” lobbying group, which urged members of Congress “to cast a life affirming ‘yes’ vote” to the Senate Health Care Reform Bill. The USCCB as well as countless pro-life organizations had opposed the bill as seriously flawed and as opening the floodgates to federal funding of abortion.
Afterwards, the Sisters of St. Joseph requested promotional support from Greensburg parishes for a vocations awareness program called “Explore,” which was meant to show teenage girls what it was like to be a sister. They were refused because of their signing of the letter.
Msgr. Lawrence T. Persico, the Greensburg diocese’s vicar general, wrote a letter on April 8 to diocesan priests stating that no diocesan office, the diocesan newspaper, or any parish or event would “would promote a vocation awareness program of any religious community that has taken a stance against the United States bishops by being a signatory of the Network document.”
Sister Mary Pellegrino, moderator of the leadership team of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Baden, claimed that “based on our prayerful discernment and careful research” there would be no public funding of abortion caused by the bill.
“It would not violate the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church,” she said. Her community has requested that the diocese reverse its decision.
This article is courtesy of LifeSiteNews.com.
The Sisters of St. Joseph in Baden, Pennsylvania opposed the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops by supporting the Health Care Reform Bill. Now Bishop Lawrence E. Brandt of Greensburg has withdrawn his diocese’s support for their community by prohibiting the use of any diocesan media or parishes in their recruitment efforts.
“He has the right to disapprove a request from a religious community that wants to host a recruitment event when that community has taken a public stance in opposition to the Church’s teaching on human life,” said diocesan spokesman Jerry Zufelt.
“Furthermore an environment of dissent and public opposition to the positions of the U.S. Catholic bishops does not provide an appropriate seedbed for vocations.”
The Sisters of St. Joseph had signed a letter written by NETWORK, a Catholic “social justice” lobbying group, which urged members of Congress “to cast a life affirming ‘yes’ vote” to the Senate Health Care Reform Bill. The USCCB as well as countless pro-life organizations had opposed the bill as seriously flawed and as opening the floodgates to federal funding of abortion.
Afterwards, the Sisters of St. Joseph requested promotional support from Greensburg parishes for a vocations awareness program called “Explore,” which was meant to show teenage girls what it was like to be a sister. They were refused because of their signing of the letter.
Msgr. Lawrence T. Persico, the Greensburg diocese’s vicar general, wrote a letter on April 8 to diocesan priests stating that no diocesan office, the diocesan newspaper, or any parish or event would “would promote a vocation awareness program of any religious community that has taken a stance against the United States bishops by being a signatory of the Network document.”
Sister Mary Pellegrino, moderator of the leadership team of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Baden, claimed that “based on our prayerful discernment and careful research” there would be no public funding of abortion caused by the bill.
“It would not violate the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church,” she said. Her community has requested that the diocese reverse its decision.
This article is courtesy of LifeSiteNews.com.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Stupak, 'Pro-Life' Allies Targeted in New Ad and Phone Call Campaign
$150,000 Campaign Also Praises True Pro-Life Democrats
WASHINGTON, April 6 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today the Susan B. Anthony List will launch a $150,000 radio advertisement and automated phone call campaign in the districts of Reps. Steve Driehaus (OH-1), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Brad Ellsworth (IN-9) , Alan Mollohan (WV-1), and Bart Stupak (MI-1) to inform voters that their 'Yes' vote on healthcare reform forces taxpayers to pay for abortion:
"Leading up to the fateful vote on healthcare reform, the Susan B. Anthony List was working tirelessly to build up grassroots support and encouragement for self- labeled 'pro-life' Democrats, including Rep. Stupak," said Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of Susan B. Anthony List. "Since these Democrats instead traded their legislative power to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion for an Executive Order that did nothing to protect the status quo and address the fundamental taxpayer abortion funding problem in the bill, we have had to change course. Now, with severe disappointment, we go back to their districts to tell voters that their representative ushered in the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade. We will make sure that their constituents understand the enormous gravity of this pro-abortion vote."
In addition, SBA List will launch a phone campaign with a message praising the true pro-life Democrats. Reps. Gene Taylor (MS-4) and Dan Lipinski (IL-3) held their resolve and stood behind their principles.
The ad running in Rep. Stupak's district includes the following narration. Ads in other districts contain similar wording:
"It was the ultimate betrayal.
"Congressman Bark Stupak told us he was pro-life. Stupak promised us he would protect the unborn. That he would stand firm...and lead the coalition to keep abortion funding out of the health care bill.
"But Bart Stupak betrayed us...and voted to spend federal dollars -- our dollars -- on abortions. He should be ashamed.
"...Tell Bart Stupak we will not forget."
Members of Congress and advocacy groups on both sides admit that President Obama's Executive Order is meaningless. On March 2, 2010, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, co-chair of the House Pro-Choice Caucus, told FOX News that "an executive order cannot change the law." The United States Conference of Catholic has said that "only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation."
This latest grassroots campaign comes on the heels of last year's nearly $2 million effort to keep abortion out of healthcare which included targeted television and radio ads, 1.3 million automated calls, 60,000 patch-through constituent calls, 1.2 million letters and petitions to Congress and two media tours in pro-life Democratic districts.
The Susan B. Anthony List is a nationwide network of Americans, over 280,000 residing in all 50 states, dedicated to mobilizing, advancing, and representing pro-life women in politics. Its connected Candidate Fund increases the percentage of pro-life women in the political process.
Christian Newswire
WASHINGTON, April 6 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today the Susan B. Anthony List will launch a $150,000 radio advertisement and automated phone call campaign in the districts of Reps. Steve Driehaus (OH-1), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Brad Ellsworth (IN-9) , Alan Mollohan (WV-1), and Bart Stupak (MI-1) to inform voters that their 'Yes' vote on healthcare reform forces taxpayers to pay for abortion:
"Leading up to the fateful vote on healthcare reform, the Susan B. Anthony List was working tirelessly to build up grassroots support and encouragement for self- labeled 'pro-life' Democrats, including Rep. Stupak," said Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of Susan B. Anthony List. "Since these Democrats instead traded their legislative power to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion for an Executive Order that did nothing to protect the status quo and address the fundamental taxpayer abortion funding problem in the bill, we have had to change course. Now, with severe disappointment, we go back to their districts to tell voters that their representative ushered in the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade. We will make sure that their constituents understand the enormous gravity of this pro-abortion vote."
In addition, SBA List will launch a phone campaign with a message praising the true pro-life Democrats. Reps. Gene Taylor (MS-4) and Dan Lipinski (IL-3) held their resolve and stood behind their principles.
The ad running in Rep. Stupak's district includes the following narration. Ads in other districts contain similar wording:
"It was the ultimate betrayal.
"Congressman Bark Stupak told us he was pro-life. Stupak promised us he would protect the unborn. That he would stand firm...and lead the coalition to keep abortion funding out of the health care bill.
"But Bart Stupak betrayed us...and voted to spend federal dollars -- our dollars -- on abortions. He should be ashamed.
"...Tell Bart Stupak we will not forget."
Members of Congress and advocacy groups on both sides admit that President Obama's Executive Order is meaningless. On March 2, 2010, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, co-chair of the House Pro-Choice Caucus, told FOX News that "an executive order cannot change the law." The United States Conference of Catholic has said that "only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation."
This latest grassroots campaign comes on the heels of last year's nearly $2 million effort to keep abortion out of healthcare which included targeted television and radio ads, 1.3 million automated calls, 60,000 patch-through constituent calls, 1.2 million letters and petitions to Congress and two media tours in pro-life Democratic districts.
The Susan B. Anthony List is a nationwide network of Americans, over 280,000 residing in all 50 states, dedicated to mobilizing, advancing, and representing pro-life women in politics. Its connected Candidate Fund increases the percentage of pro-life women in the political process.
Christian Newswire
Monday, February 22, 2010
President Creates Need to Reject Health Care Bill, Says Fr. Pavone
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 /Christian Newswire/ -- Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued the following statement today in response to the release of President Obama's version of health care reform legislation.
"The American people have already made their concerns about health care reform known," said Fr. Pavone. "The President's refusal to listen now makes it necessary to reject the bill in its entirety rather than to seek to reform it any further."
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
"The American people have already made their concerns about health care reform known," said Fr. Pavone. "The President's refusal to listen now makes it necessary to reject the bill in its entirety rather than to seek to reform it any further."
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
Friday, February 19, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
This time they want the Post Office to cancel a planned new stamp honoring Mother Teresa
From: Brian Burch - CatholicVoteAction.org
Date sent 02/11/2010 09:02:20 am
Subject: Who hates Mother Teresa?
Dear CatholicVote Member,
The anti-religion crusaders are at it again.
This time they want the Post Office to cancel a planned new stamp honoring Mother Teresa.
I am continually shocked by the persistence of these activist groups. They seem to never give up! Any mention or reference of God must be wiped out. The Pledge of Allegiance, In God We Trust, you name it… they want it boarded up, whitewashed, and banished from our public life.
But not this time. Not Mother Teresa.
Sign on to our group letter to the Postmaster General here – http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
A group called the Freedom from Religion Foundation is now spreading lies about Blessed Mother Teresa accusing this holy nun of having a ‘darker side,’ and calling her a ‘polarizing Roman Catholic figurehead.’
That’s why we decided to act swiftly and make sure this anti-Mother Teresa campaign doesn’t gain any more momentum.
The groups now protesting the new stamp never protested other stamps honoring Gandhi, or even Martin Luther King, Jr. who proudly understood his fight for civil rights to be rooted in his Christian faith.
What is plain is that these groups not only dislike Mother Teresa, they despise the Catholic Church. They simply cannot stomach the thought of the United States Postal Service honoring a Catholic nun who spoke out against abortion, contraception, and against the atheistic materialism of the west.
In her famous 1994 speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Mother Teresa closed with these words:
“From here, a sign of care for the weakest of the weak - the unborn child - must go out to the world. If you become a burning light of justice and peace in the world, then really you will be true to what the founders of this country stood for. God bless you!”
Please sign our letter to Postmaster General Jack Potter at http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
Please send this to your friends and family too. We need to push back against this ugly campaign, and stand up for this holy nun and all that she lived for.
Mother Teresa stood up for the best of America’s ideals. Now it’s time we stand up for her.
Sincerely,
Brian Burch
President
CatholicVoteAction.org
P.S. The Post Office announced that the new Mother Teresa stamp will be released August 26th. I plan to buy hundreds of them for all our business mail at CatholicVote! Tell the Postmaster you support the new stamp by signing our petition at http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
NOTE: This message was paid for by CatholicVoteAction.org. As a public policy advocacy group, contributions to CatholicVoteAction.org are NOT tax-deductible. Contributions to CatholicVote.org remain tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CatholicVoteAction.org, P.O. Box 2709, Chicago, IL 60690
Call us at 312-201-6559
Support CatholicVoteAction by visiting https://www.catholicvoteaction.org/donations.php
Date sent 02/11/2010 09:02:20 am
Subject: Who hates Mother Teresa?
Dear CatholicVote Member,
The anti-religion crusaders are at it again.
This time they want the Post Office to cancel a planned new stamp honoring Mother Teresa.
I am continually shocked by the persistence of these activist groups. They seem to never give up! Any mention or reference of God must be wiped out. The Pledge of Allegiance, In God We Trust, you name it… they want it boarded up, whitewashed, and banished from our public life.
But not this time. Not Mother Teresa.
Sign on to our group letter to the Postmaster General here – http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
A group called the Freedom from Religion Foundation is now spreading lies about Blessed Mother Teresa accusing this holy nun of having a ‘darker side,’ and calling her a ‘polarizing Roman Catholic figurehead.’
That’s why we decided to act swiftly and make sure this anti-Mother Teresa campaign doesn’t gain any more momentum.
The groups now protesting the new stamp never protested other stamps honoring Gandhi, or even Martin Luther King, Jr. who proudly understood his fight for civil rights to be rooted in his Christian faith.
What is plain is that these groups not only dislike Mother Teresa, they despise the Catholic Church. They simply cannot stomach the thought of the United States Postal Service honoring a Catholic nun who spoke out against abortion, contraception, and against the atheistic materialism of the west.
In her famous 1994 speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Mother Teresa closed with these words:
“From here, a sign of care for the weakest of the weak - the unborn child - must go out to the world. If you become a burning light of justice and peace in the world, then really you will be true to what the founders of this country stood for. God bless you!”
Please sign our letter to Postmaster General Jack Potter at http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
Please send this to your friends and family too. We need to push back against this ugly campaign, and stand up for this holy nun and all that she lived for.
Mother Teresa stood up for the best of America’s ideals. Now it’s time we stand up for her.
Sincerely,
Brian Burch
President
CatholicVoteAction.org
P.S. The Post Office announced that the new Mother Teresa stamp will be released August 26th. I plan to buy hundreds of them for all our business mail at CatholicVote! Tell the Postmaster you support the new stamp by signing our petition at http://www.stampoutbigotry.com/
NOTE: This message was paid for by CatholicVoteAction.org. As a public policy advocacy group, contributions to CatholicVoteAction.org are NOT tax-deductible. Contributions to CatholicVote.org remain tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CatholicVoteAction.org, P.O. Box 2709, Chicago, IL 60690
Call us at 312-201-6559
Support CatholicVoteAction by visiting https://www.catholicvoteaction.org/donations.php
Catholic Coalition Petitions Bishops Conference to End Pro-Abortion Grants
WASHINGTON, Feb. 11 /Christian Newswire/ -- American Life League, Human Life International, Catholic Advocate, Bellarmine Veritas Ministry and Real Catholic TV, members of the Reform CCHD Now coalition, launched a petition drive Thursday asking the bishops to suspend United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) grants.
The effort comes after repeated calls over the past three months for explanations from the USCCB in response to the discovery of CCHD money spent to support organizations promoting abortion and same- sex marriage.
American Catholics will be asked to sign the following at http://www.reformcchdnow.com/:
"To ensure no more Catholic dollars are spent to support organizations advocating abortion or same- sex marriage, I respectfully request the bishops suspend all national CCHD grants until the grants process has been reformed."
"Transparency and responsible stewardship of the money donated by hard-working American Catholics to further the mission of the Church should be a top priority for those in positions of authority at the Bishops' Conference," said Catholic Advocate Vice President Matt Smith.
A copy of the petition will be presented to the following:
• Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development
• Bishop Roger Morin of Biloxi, Mississippi and Chairman of the USCCB Subcommittee on the CCHD
• Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas, Texas and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on National Collections
• Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, Texas and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities
• Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky and Chairman of the USCCB Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage
CCHD donations are traditionally collected the weekend before Thanksgiving each year as one of the thirteen funds of the USCCB's National Collections program. Donations average between $7 - 9 million annually.
Below is a summary of what has transpired since information on CCHD grant recipients first surfaced in August 2009 by the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry.
* In October 2009, Human Life International, American Life League and the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry formed the Reform CCHD Now coalition. Twenty-one organizations are now members of the coalition.
* On Oct. 2 Bishop Morin announced that CCHD grantee groups Young Workers United and the Chinese Progressive Association had been defunded in response to the reports.
* In November 2009 the Reform CCHD Now coalition revealed the CCHD was supporting 31 organizations which are members of a radically pro-abortion, pro same sex marriage organization.
* Also in November 2009 another detailed report was issued by American Life League and Bellarmine Veritas Ministry implicating MIV partners, CA Partnership partners, SFOP, Preble Street, Voces De La Frontera, and many others.
* By Nov. 25, 2009 LifeSiteNews reported that five bishops had decided to discontinue the CCHD collection.
* On Monday, Feb. 1 American Life League and the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry released further information on CCHD ties to the pro-abortion, same sex marriage Center for Community Change. Two top USCCB executives involved with the CCHD have served on the board of the CCC.
* On Tuesday, February 2, 2010, RealCatholicTV.com released video evidence that within hours of the initial story breaking, the USCCB and Center for Community Change each removed any reference to the other organization from their respective websites.
* On Tuesday, Feb. 2 Catholic Advocate called upon the Catholic Campaign for Human Development to suspend its grants pending "a complete review of its awards process."
The USCCB has yet to adequately respond to any of the charges since Bishop Morin's Oct. 2 memorandum, but has instead attempted to reframe the reports as a personal attack against USCCB employees.
"We remain hopeful these issues will be addressed, potentially leading to a renewal of the CCHD, and making it an organization that is a source of unity rather than division in the Church," said Human Life International's Stephen Phelan.
Phelan added, "we respectfully ask the Episcopal leadership of the USCCB to consider the petition in good faith."
The Reform CCHD Now coalition is a group of 21 Catholic organizations concerned that funds provided to the National Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) in special annual collections continued to support organizations that advocate for abortion and same-sex marriage. For more information on the Reform CCHD Now Coalition please see http://www.reformcchdnow.com/ and contact Stephen Phelan at 540-622-5270 (sphelan@hli.org) or Katie Walker at 540-659-4942 (kwalker@all.org).
Christian Newswire
The effort comes after repeated calls over the past three months for explanations from the USCCB in response to the discovery of CCHD money spent to support organizations promoting abortion and same- sex marriage.
American Catholics will be asked to sign the following at http://www.reformcchdnow.com/:
"To ensure no more Catholic dollars are spent to support organizations advocating abortion or same- sex marriage, I respectfully request the bishops suspend all national CCHD grants until the grants process has been reformed."
"Transparency and responsible stewardship of the money donated by hard-working American Catholics to further the mission of the Church should be a top priority for those in positions of authority at the Bishops' Conference," said Catholic Advocate Vice President Matt Smith.
A copy of the petition will be presented to the following:
• Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development
• Bishop Roger Morin of Biloxi, Mississippi and Chairman of the USCCB Subcommittee on the CCHD
• Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas, Texas and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on National Collections
• Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, Texas and Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities
• Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky and Chairman of the USCCB Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage
CCHD donations are traditionally collected the weekend before Thanksgiving each year as one of the thirteen funds of the USCCB's National Collections program. Donations average between $7 - 9 million annually.
Below is a summary of what has transpired since information on CCHD grant recipients first surfaced in August 2009 by the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry.
* In October 2009, Human Life International, American Life League and the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry formed the Reform CCHD Now coalition. Twenty-one organizations are now members of the coalition.
* On Oct. 2 Bishop Morin announced that CCHD grantee groups Young Workers United and the Chinese Progressive Association had been defunded in response to the reports.
* In November 2009 the Reform CCHD Now coalition revealed the CCHD was supporting 31 organizations which are members of a radically pro-abortion, pro same sex marriage organization.
* Also in November 2009 another detailed report was issued by American Life League and Bellarmine Veritas Ministry implicating MIV partners, CA Partnership partners, SFOP, Preble Street, Voces De La Frontera, and many others.
* By Nov. 25, 2009 LifeSiteNews reported that five bishops had decided to discontinue the CCHD collection.
* On Monday, Feb. 1 American Life League and the Bellarmine Veritas Ministry released further information on CCHD ties to the pro-abortion, same sex marriage Center for Community Change. Two top USCCB executives involved with the CCHD have served on the board of the CCC.
* On Tuesday, February 2, 2010, RealCatholicTV.com released video evidence that within hours of the initial story breaking, the USCCB and Center for Community Change each removed any reference to the other organization from their respective websites.
* On Tuesday, Feb. 2 Catholic Advocate called upon the Catholic Campaign for Human Development to suspend its grants pending "a complete review of its awards process."
The USCCB has yet to adequately respond to any of the charges since Bishop Morin's Oct. 2 memorandum, but has instead attempted to reframe the reports as a personal attack against USCCB employees.
"We remain hopeful these issues will be addressed, potentially leading to a renewal of the CCHD, and making it an organization that is a source of unity rather than division in the Church," said Human Life International's Stephen Phelan.
Phelan added, "we respectfully ask the Episcopal leadership of the USCCB to consider the petition in good faith."
The Reform CCHD Now coalition is a group of 21 Catholic organizations concerned that funds provided to the National Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) in special annual collections continued to support organizations that advocate for abortion and same-sex marriage. For more information on the Reform CCHD Now Coalition please see http://www.reformcchdnow.com/ and contact Stephen Phelan at 540-622-5270 (sphelan@hli.org) or Katie Walker at 540-659-4942 (kwalker@all.org).
Christian Newswire
Monday, February 08, 2010
Friday, February 05, 2010
Omission in Planned Parenthood's Tebow Response Speaks Volumes -- Dr. Alveda King
ATLANTA, Feb. 5 /Christian Newswire/ -- Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., commented today on Planned Parenthood's response to the Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad.
"Planned Parenthood's response to the Tebow family's Super Bowl ad continues that organization's history of deception," said Dr. King. "It features two African Americans, Planned Parenthood's preferred target for abortion, talking about 'respecting' women's choices without ever mentioning the 'A' word. Spare me. If abortion is supposed to be a choice that everyone respects, why can't Planned Parenthood even allow the word to be spoken?"
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro- life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
"Planned Parenthood's response to the Tebow family's Super Bowl ad continues that organization's history of deception," said Dr. King. "It features two African Americans, Planned Parenthood's preferred target for abortion, talking about 'respecting' women's choices without ever mentioning the 'A' word. Spare me. If abortion is supposed to be a choice that everyone respects, why can't Planned Parenthood even allow the word to be spoken?"
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro- life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Christian Newswire
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
