Recently in Culture of Life Category

This week - probably because of everything going on in the world - is a more serious collection of posts that I remember seeing recently. And it makes for compelling reading that really challenges you to think through your preconceptions and understand Catholic teaching. That's not to say there aren't a few lighter posts, but this Carnival is a little heavier than most! Enjoy:

Father Aloysius starts us off with Fundamental Truth at Life's Crosses. This post explores our reasons for being and why we reject the overtures from God so often.

Next we move to Mini Confessions at Quantum Theology where we hear the outcome of sending a 14-year-old to a face-to-face confession rather than a penance service.

Never forget that God Alone is Enough as explained on Thoughts on Grace. When you are filled with fear, remember St. Theresa's poem and know that God alone is enough.

Steven highly recommends him, so he reviewed J.F. Powers Bibliography at Book Reviews and More. Powers is an excellent Catholic short story writer that you should know more about. This is a good place to start!

Poetry speaks and convicts in Like Dinner on Wood at Long Skirts. It is a poem about how Catholics before us were willing to be served up Like Dinner on Wood to preserve the Faith.

Okay, I admit it at Homeschool Goodies takes us in a different direction: She admits being a "dance mom" and explains the benefits her homeschooled children receive from dance.

Keeping on that theme, Homeschooling: A Growing Trend at A Catholic Mom Climbing the Pillars explores the question of why people are homeschooling and paints a great picture of the homeschooling family.

Sarah makes grape jelly in The Color Purple at Just Another Day of Catholic Pondering. She also reflects on opportunities for prayer during her work. Wow - sounds delicious . . .

A Reflection . . . at Organ-ic Chemist ponders a homily on the reading from September 14 where the image of a snake is raised to save those who were bitten. What caught her attention was the pastor's reference to a snake being an ambivalent symbol.

Another reflection on the same readings: God's Punishment and Salvation at HMS Blog. As always, HMS Blog is definitely worth your time. It also focuses on the image of a snake prefiguring Christ.

Moving to politics, Over the Edge? at A Catholic View points out that Bishop Niederauer wants to speak with Nancy Pelosi about her recent misstatements on Catholic positions. Can we expect anything to come from this? Interesting comic included.

In a moving post, an Abortion Survivor Pleads with Obama in New Ad at Catholic Fire. Gianna Jessen survived when her mother's abortion was botched. She asks Senator Obama why he would vote against a bill requiring doctors to provide medical attention to babies born during botched abortions. It's a powerful ad.

Staying in politics, The Change We Need at Living Catholicism takes a closer look at Senator Obama's stance on abortion and how it matches up against Catholic teaching. Includes the USCCB's points from Faithful Citizenship.

Don't miss the Worldwide Rosary for Unborn Babies reported on at A Life of Benevolence. The event happens on October 18th and you can find the details in this post.

Serious issues continue with Suicide and Salvation at Aggie Catholics. Is it a sin to think about killing yourself? How about to try to kill yourself? This post explains Catholic teaching.

Notes from a Subculturist at The Catholic Journeyman explains what a subculturalist is and how they find balance, beauty, and battlescars in Catholic apologetics.

We finish up with Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard at Prepare for Mass offers a series of videos exploring the readings - it's a great way to get prepared for Mass!

God bless,
Jay

As a person committed to the pro-life cause, I was relieved by McCain's selection of a strong pro-life Vice Presidential running mate. Rumours kept circulating about a pro-abortion candidate, but thankfully McCain stayed on course and selected Governor Sarah Palin as the potential VP.

So on one side, you have the Democratic Pro-Abortion machine and on the other a Pro-Life team. And when we say "pro-abortion machine" we mean it - as I've noted earlier, Senator Obama actually supported a bill that would let babies born during a botch abortion simply died in front of a doctor that could save their lives. This is the extreme, but how could a man so heartless run our country?

The Right to Life is the basis of all other rights in our country. Without this right, no others seem to matter. And the way to stop the holocaust of abortion is by starting with yourself: be pro-life, live pro-life, and vote pro-life. Governor Sarah Palin not only says she's pro-life, but she actually has proven it in her personal life, which matters more than any words she could speak. Governor Palin had her fifth child knowing that he would be born with Downs Syndrome. This is a woman that understands the value of life, unlike those on the other side of the aisle.

Let's pray that God gives Americans the wisdom to vote pro-life in this presidential race. The last thing we need is Senator Obama bringing his horrific policies to a national stage.

God bless,
Jay

Is this the end of belief in Darwinism? An interesting article called The Sunset of Darwinism at Tradition, Family, and Property suggests that this might be the end:

"What is left, then, in evolutionism, that is valid according to the scientific method? Nothing, actually nothing!" This is the conclusion of journalist Marco Respinti in his recent book Processo a Darwin (Darwin on Trial, Piemme, 2007). He continues: "Not one of his postulates can be verified or certified based on the method proper to the physical sciences. His whole claim escapes verification. Based on what, therefore, other than on strong prejudices of an ideological nature, can anyone affirm or continue to affirm that the evolutionist hypothesis is true?"

But the article continues by showing more and more scientists no longer believe that Darwinism is a scientifically provable hypothesis:

Francis Crick, who together with Watson discovered the structure of DNA, openly declared, "An honest man, armed only with the knowledge available to us, could affirm only that, in a certain sense, the origin of life at the moment appears to be rather a miracle," In the same wavelength, Harold Hurey, a disciple of Stanley Miller who made history with his failed attempt to recreate life in the laboratory from a so-called primordial broth, said, "All of us who studied the origins of life uphold that the more we get into it, the more we feel it is too complex to have evolved in any way." Indeed, a lot of faith is required to believe in evolutionism, and it is precisely that faith, of a clearly positivist[1] mold, that is now beginning to weaken.

Go read the full article here, it's worth your time. If this is the sunset of Darwinism, then it's about time. There's lots of faith in Darwinism, but not much science.
 
God bless,
Jay

May God forgive us all for the holocaust of abortion:

Remember this video as you go to vote for the next President.

God bless,
Jay

This is actually a fascinating new turn in the debate over birth control. Basically the short version is this: birth control pills work by putting hormones into your body. These hormones are then excreted from the body and end up in our water supply. However, there is no currently used way to remove them from the water supply, so tap water now contains some of these potent hormones, which are affecting men, women, and children who drink water.

I was actually told this by a friend and started doing some research. Here are a few of the articles I uncovered:

• Gender-bender threat in Sewage. Hormones found in Australian water (one of the earlier places to test this).
  
• Hormones in water blamed as more men seek breast reduction. From the Times in the UK.
  
• CMU Chemists target sex hormones in water supplies.
  

Remember, contraception was condemned by every Christian church until the 1920's, when the Church of England first allowed it in "extreme" situations. Now only the Catholic Church stands by the 2000 year tradition of condemning birth control just as the Bible does. This acts as just another reason to follow the law of God rather than the desires of man in terms of birth control.

The consequences seem serious: breast cancer, early onset of puberty, testicular cancer, and more. Time to throw away those pills and come back to God!

God bless,
Jay

Just wanted to mention this week's Catholic Carnival is up here. It's focused on what children teach parents, so it's a little different than most, but worth checking out (as always).

God bless,
Jay

There is a lot of trash being labeled as entertainment nowadays. It seems like movies have to have more violence and more sex to keep people coming to see them. What I find to be especially disturbing is how horror films have to keep going deeper into the satanic world to give people a thrill. Every now and then, a movie comes out that returns our faith in humanity. And in September, that movie will be “Bella”. Every person of good will must see this movie (and every movie like it) if we want to send a clear message to the entertainment industry that what sells is what is good and true, not what is cheap and degrading.

The movie stars the Mexican acting sensation Eduardo Verastegui, who has a wonderful conversion story. At 17 he left his home village of Xicotencatl, Tamaulipas for Mexico City to become a lawyer. While he was in the big city he got involved in modeling and eventually acting. He started living the typical celebrity life with the desire for more wealth, women, fame, and power. But of course, he wasn’t happy. He was setting his sites on Hollywood, when his English teacher started asking him questions that led to his conversion. After discerning that the priesthood was not his vocation, he continued his acting career in Los Angeles, and providence has allowed him to meet the right people for “Bella” to be made.

In the movie, a single waitress played by Tammy Blanchard finds out right before going to work that she’s pregnant. Then, at work, she gets another shock and it looks like her life is falling apart. Suddenly, the chef of the restaurant, played by Eduardo Verastegui comes to her rescue and the adventure begins. After having worked for him day in and day out, she finds out who this man really is.

“Bella” is set to be one of the most impressive pro-life movies ever made. It has won numerous awards and is being promoted by pro-life groups such as Heartbeat International, “Celebrate Life” magazine, and others. This movie is also said to transcend all expectations. It has opened in Texas and is scheduled for national release September 15th. Please help promote this film. To have it come to a theater near you, see www.BellaTheMovie.com, e-mail contact@MetanoiaFilms.com and call 888-474-6025.

Pax et Bonum,
Daniel

The Vatican is now urging Catholics to stop donating money to Amnesty International because of their support for abortion. For years Amnesty International has been moving towards accepting abortion as a basic right for women. And now they have changed their overall policy to support abortion in several instances:

"We are saying broadly that to criminalise women's management of their sexual reproductive right is the wrong answer," Amnesty's deputy Secretary General Kate Gilmore told Reuters news agency.

It's interesting that Ms. Gilmore didn't mention the need to protect unborn infants. I am constantly saddened by advocacy groups adopting abortion as if it was a great struggle they just can't ignore. Too bad for us and too bad for Amnesty International. I have given to them in the past, but will no more. We've written on the Amnesty International change in policy in the past.

God bless,
Jay

Our Mothers leave an unmistakable image upon us. And their example is carried with us throughout our lives – even after they are gone. Mothers are truly a gift meant to bring us closer to Christ by example.

But there’s another important point sometimes lost in the fun of Mother’s Day: Motherhood is also a gift from God for which we should be very thankful. We read in the Bible that only God can open the womb (Gen 29:31, Gen 30:2, 1 Sam 1:5, Is 44:2, and so on) and that children are always a gift from God. Motherhood is, just as Mothers are, a gift from God that should be celebrated.

If we think through this there are a few certainties: God chooses whom to give a child to. God, for a reason we may not understand, gave each mother on earth a child for a reason. We should celebrate children as a gift, rather than a burden or expense (or something that should be controlled). Mother Teresa once remarked that saying there are too many children in the world is like saying there are too many flowers. Each child is a gift from God that should be cherished as such.

This Mother’s Day, let us celebrate God’s gift of Motherhood as well as God’s gift of Mothers. Each mom can contemplate why God choose to give her the children He did. There are many women who try diligently to have kids and find it physically impossible. But for others, God has given you another gift you can never repay: a miraculous child.

God bless,
Jay

PS - Joe, a writer on this blog and close friend of mine, just had his second child, a little girl named Emma, on Thursday. Our congratulations go to him and his wife, Krista.

Some great news concerning Life today: the Supreme Court upheld the national ban on partial birth abortion. As one of the most vile procedures, it involves partially delivering a living child, but crushing the baby's head or sucking out the brains before the child is fully delivered. Thanks be to God we now have a reasonable law that bans this horrific way of killing a child.

Unfortunately for Jack, they didn't comment on the impending collapse of the environment. ;-)

God bless,
Jay

It’s a little early, but the 2008 Presidential elections are getting started and I think it’s an appropriate time to take an initial look at the field. For the last six years, President Bush has done some good things for the pro-life movement, even if you don’t agree with his other policies. But the 2008 elections aren’t starting off well for the pro-life movement (and for unborn babies everywhere).

Obviously the Democrats continue to kneel to the Sacrament of Abortion, which makes it impossible for a pro-lifer to vote in that direction. But this election is starting off even worse – both of the leading candidates are vehemently anti-life:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Senator Clinton is 100% pro-choice and clear on it. She regularly votes 100% of the time with NARAL and 0% of the time with the National Right to Life Committee. In fact, she even supported the horrific partial-birth abortion and opposes any limits on abortion. She is also strongly for embryonic stem cell research. And her health care reforms of years past (that has suggested will come back if she is president) suggest she at least implicitly would allow euthanasia.

Senator Barack Obama
Like his opponent in the primaries, Senator Obama is a disaster when it comes to pro-life issues. He is unequivocally pro-abortion and also supports partial-birth abortion. He votes against any limitations on the murder of unborn infants. In fact, he even voted against protecting infants that were born alive during an abortion (he wanted doctors to be able to kill them). NARAL Pro-Choice America gave him a perfect pro-abortion rating. Obama has also issued statements in support of more embryonic stem cell research. So far, I don’t believe Senator Obama has issued statements on euthanasia .

John Edwards
Edwards recently fired the two anti-Catholic bloggers he had hired, but that doesn’t make him pro-Catholic, does it? Unfortunately he isn’t pro-life either. Perhaps a distant third from the other two candidates, Edwards still gets a lot of press as Kerry’s vice presidential candidate. Edwards sums up his position well, “I support a woman's right to choose and believe this that right is constitutionally protected. I also support funding for family planning.” He also (like most Democrats, unfortunately) has a perfect rating by NARAL Pro-Choice America. He even voted against a bill that would make it a crime to harm an unborn child while committing another crime and voted against banning partial-birth abortion. He also voted in favor of expanding embryonic stem cell research, which the Catholic Church has been clear is very immoral (it requires destroying the unborn).

Unfortunately the Republicans aren’t looking good either. There are three “main” candidates at this point and two are pro-abortion, the third was until recently:

Rudi Giuliani
Former-mayor of New York, Rudi Giuliani, seems to be ahead in most polls of likely contenders. This alone should bother pro-lifers. Because of Giuliani’s actions in the wake of September 11th, some haven’t realized his position on abortion yet. On a recent CNN interview Giuliani stated, “I am pro-choice, but I am also, as you know, against abortion. Hate abortion. Never liked it.” That’s a far cry from being pro-life and suggests he would push legislation at least protecting the role of abortion in society, if not trying to repeal much of current President Bush’s progress. Giuliani also supports embryonic stem cell research. It is not clear where Giuliani stands on issues like euthanasia.

Senator John McCain
McCain is perhaps close to Giuliani in terms of potential. However, McCain is also not a pro-lifer. He often either votes against pro-life legislation or does not vote at all (lately he seems to be backing off his hard-line pro-abortion stance, perhaps because of the planned White House run). McCain has also mocked voters who overemphasize the pro-life position on politicians – apparently he doesn’t understand that this issue is a clear indicator of a politician’s morals in other areas. He also supports more embryonic stem cell research. McCain also hasn’t been clear on Euthanasia, however his Reform Institute has accepted money from the liberal Educational Foundation of America, which supports euthanasia (among other things). This is far from evidence that he supports physician-assisted suicide, but I can find no evidence he opposes it, either.

Mitt Romney
Famous for being Morman, Romney has been a pro-abortion Republican since the 60’s and ran on a pro-choice platform as recently as 2002 while running for Governor of Massachusetts. But now he is claiming to be fully pro-life due to a conversation with an embryonic stem cell researcher:

“The comment was made that this really wasn't a moral issue, because the embryos were terminated or destroyed at 14 days. And it struck me very powerfully at that point, that the Roe v. Wade approach has so cheapened the value of human life that someone could think it's not a moral issue to destroy embryos that have been created solely for the purpose of research, and I said to my chief of staff, and that's been 2 1/2 years ago, I said to her, 'I want to make it very clear that I'm pro-life.” -- Mitt Romney

There is still some controversy over the whole issue, but it appears that Romney will push a pro-life agenda. However, Romney still believes abortion is okay for rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother. And Romney is also for more embryonic stem cell research. He tries to mitigate the damage in his position by suggesting only “excess” unborn children be destroyed for this procedure, but he still supports it. As far as I can tell, Romney has not clarified his position on euthanasia.

Presidential Election 2008: A Disaster for Life?
At this point the next election isn’t looking too good for the Culture of Life. There is not a single pure pro-life candidate on the ballot at this point, however remember that it is early and former President Clinton came out of nowhere in 1992. So there is time, but I’m not sure who the strong candidate would be.

When pro-lifers vote for Democrats or pro-abortion candidates it mitigates the issue on a national scale – and pro-life candidates are removed from office. Pro-abortion candidates these days believe they can get some of the religious votes, even with a perfect rating from NARAL. Remember, the biggest indicator of a candidates morality is his decision of whether or not to protect the unborn, which are the weakest members of our society.

God bless,
Jay

Social justice is an important area of the life of the Church. It strives to protect the dignity of the human person, which is made in the image and likeness of God. When one says the phrase, what words come to mind? Most would probably say issues like poverty, immigration, just war, labor issues, etc. Indeed, the US Conference of Catholic Bishop’s website (rightly, I think) includes those issues under the topic of social justice. But I propose that the faithful need to start thinking of “life” and “family” issues as the primary subcategories of social justice. To keep this article short, I will only focus on the “life” subcategory. A second article will follow on the “family” subcategory.

The abortion issue needs to be front and center on the Church’s fight for social justice, and it must be seen as social justice. It is clear that the right to life is the fundamental right upon which all other rights can exist. And because the law currently does not allow some to have this right, this issue is of primary importance to fight. Ironically, many who fight for social justice do not assent to this truth, and this includes many Catholics who fight for social justice. I work for a Catholic non-profit organization that helps “the poor” and, sadly, I witness this often. I am frustrated at the extent of this problem, and how little it is addressed. Unfortunately, the divorce of “pro-life” issues from social justice perpetuates this problem, and makes wonderful organizations like Priests for Life look more like narrow-minded, single-issue focused extremists rather than the social justice champions they truly are.

Another reason why the abortion issue is of primary importance is that it is a black and white issue, while most social justice issues are in a gray area. They have to either balance the rights of two different entities, or have several moral options for their solutions. Let’s take the immigration issue and poverty for each example. People have a right to look for work and to provide for their families while being paid a just wage for their labor. On the other hand, nations have the right to protect their borders and enforce their laws. Social justice should lead us toward policies that balance the rights of both of these entities and bring about the most good.
There are several moral options for the question “what is the best way to help lift people out of poverty?” Should we raise the minimum wage? If so, how much? If we do, what negative economic consequences will that bring? Will the new economic equilibrium put in place by raising the minimum wage truly help the poor? There are no black and white moral answers to these questions, and policies that try to bring about the most good should be shaped by fair and sound economic research.

These are examples of gray areas where Catholics can disagree in good faith, and should debate the policy that would bring about the most good. Abortion does not fall into either of these gray areas; there are no opposing rights and the killing of an innocent is never a moral option. Fighting the holocaust of abortion is a black and white, non-negotiable, primary social justice issue; this we cannot debate. Unfortunately, many Catholics involved in social justice see it as a gray issue and the others as black and white. We must work and pray to clear this confusion.

In Christ,
Daniel

Lo, sons are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one's youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them! - - Psalm 127:3-5

Nightline last night ran a special on a quickly growing Evangelical movement called the "QuiverFull movement." What makes this movement unique is that it rejects all forms of contraception and family planning and leaves the planning up to God.

Now Nightline was unfortunately woefully ignorant of the Catholic stance, which also rejects birth control as sinful. But they also missed out on the history here. Until the 1930's, every Christian church rejected contraception as a sin. At that point, the Anglican church first allowed contraception in extreme cases, but within 50 years virtually all Christian churches had begun allowing contraception as a right of marriage. Nightline did interview a protestant pastor who claimed that God was not asking us to make the sacrifice that this family was making. He misses the fact that sacrifice is a reality of Christian life and if we can trust God with our finances, with our souls, then why not with our family planning. Does God not know better than us? By the way, the Bible calls us to reject contraception.

You can learn more at QuiverFull.com. There's also a book available, which I would recommend to protestants who think this sounds crazy. Remember, no one wishes they had less children when they die . . .

God bless,
Jay

Well, a new election is just around the corner and debates are beginning about "single issue" voters versus voters who choose on multiple issues. I just wanted to point out that the Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics is now updated for the election. It is clearly the best overview of how we should vote.

To give a little summary, there are some issues that are so important they force us to vote on them first: abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, homosexual marriage, etc. So you should not vote for supporters of this type of garbage period. Then they go into details on how and why to vote in a morally correct way. I highly recommend taking a look.

God bless,
Jay

Just wanted to push out a few of the Culture of Life issues in the news, since today is Respect Life Sunday. Here’s the most important ones.

Amnesty International toys with Abortion
One we reported on earlier is Amnesty International deciding whether abortion should be a global right that they fight for. They continue along this path – please contact them now and ask Amnesty to remain neutral to abortion (as they were before). Otherwise we simply can’t give money to them any longer.

Columbia joins the ranks of the Infamous
On August 25th of this year the first legal abortion was performed in Columbia, a formerly pro-life country. As an 11 year old girl (she was raped by her stepfather) received an abortion, pro-lifers demonstrated outside. It’s a road that never gets better.

A Democrat suprises Everyone
The Democratic Party is trying to walk a tightrope: they want to keep abortion legal because of their base, but they want to pretend that abortion is bad to get the moderate pro-life voter (typically Catholics). So they’ve issued two bills meant to lower the abortion rate in the country. The first was a terrible attempt that simply provided contraception to try and lower abortion (this NEVER, NEVER works – every study proves it). But Rep. Lincoln Davis, a Democrat from Tennessee, finally introduced a pro-life bill that tries to lower abortion through better health coverage, adoption tax credits, and grants for low-income parents to attend college. Called the Pregnant Women Support Act, it is a step in the right direction – of course a better direction would be to stop performing abortions. But this is better than nothing.

One for the Bad Guys
The group Catholics for a Free Choice (which is not a Catholic group; they are not run by Catholics and run contrary to Catholic doctrine) is a pro-abortion group that attacks pro-life groups. Try thinking of a way to explain that to God. They have succeeded in one area by getting the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of Operation Rescue West – a pro-life group engaged in trying to stop abortion. Operation Rescue West did overstep their bounds, but thankfully they were able to reorganize as Operation Rescue.

Fighting RU-486
A new strategy has arisen by Republicans (namely Sen. DeMint of South Carolina) to stop the over-the-counter sale of RU-486, which is the “morning after pill” that causes abortions. He’s trying to block Dr. von Eschenbach from the position of head of the FDA after he supported the over-the-counter sale of RU-486 (some would say he did it to get the position, since Senator Clinton and others would not confirm him without this move). From Senator DeMint:

I believe a qualified FDA nominee would publicly discourage the use of RU-486 and take immediate steps to suspend the drug until a full investigation can be completed.

Thanks to the National Catholic Register for the quote.

Respect Life Sunday
Today is Respect Life Sunday – it’s always the first Sunday in October. As followers of Christ, we are asked to recommit ourselves to bringing about a culture of life in the world. Please spend some time in prayer today asking God to help us stop abortion and euthanasia. Feel free to include contraception and the death penalty as well. The start of a Culture of Life begins at home: teach your children to love life from conception to natural death. And pray daily that the scourge of abortion ends.

God bless,
Jay

You may or may not have realized that religious leaders from a wide variety of religions came together in Moscow at the World Summit of Religious Leaders, which ended today. It's extremely difficult to get consensus in this type of forum, especially since non-Christian religions were included which don't necessarily uphold Christian values. But they did issue a final statement, which had some remarkable consensus.

The biggest surprise for me was the condemnation of abortion in an indirect way:

It is, therefore, necessary to assert constantly the highest value of human life from conception to the final breath and natural death. Thus the family needs support today, for it is the privileged context for cultivating the free, intelligent and moral personality. We call for more assistance to the family, particularly in its formative mission by national and international law and the practice of states, various public institutions, religious communities and the mass media. Linked to this is our concern for the status of women and children in many societies. Promoting the unique character of every person, women and men, children and the elderly, as well as people with disabilities, we see that they all have their special gifts. Protecting them from violence and exploitation is a common task for the authorities, the society, and religious communities.

That's a pretty powerful statement coming from this body of religious leaders (let's hope it has an impact that United Nations and Amnesty International, in particular.

They also focused on religious freedom in the world and our individual rights to that freedom. It's worth taking a few moments and reading the full text of the final declaration keeping in mind that it's not a perfect document from a strictly Christian point of view, but it is a very helpful one if organizations like the United Nations take it seriously.

God bless,
Jay

Last week Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo called for excommunication of scientists involved in embryonic stem cell research. Excommunication for those not aware is not widely used in the Church today, but can occur automatically for those involved in certain activities. For example, doctors who perform an abortion essentially excommunicate themselves by performing the procedure (as do the women receiving the abortion). The Cardinal is calling for a similar situation for those scientists involved in embryonic stem cell research, which destroys the child just as an abortion does.

Christian teaching has held that life begins at conception (not implantation, not birth). So an egg and sperm combine to form a baby that simply has not been born. This embryo has the same right to life that we each have after birth. Killing the embryo through abortion is murder just as killing a week old baby would be. There is no difference between abortion and embryonic stem cell research, so I believe the Cardinal is absolutely correct.

Does this really matter in practical terms? I'm not sure. Frankly the Church has been very clear on the problems and sin involved in embryonic stem cell research, so the Catholic scientists performing this action probably aren't serious about their faith. However it does help the Church explain the seriousness of the action and clarify her understanding of the sin involved. In other words, it removes all excuses which might help some scientists to reconsider their actions and will help the Church explain more clearly her position.

Excommunication is the highest spiritual penalty the Church can attach to a sin. As the Encyclopedia of Catholic Doctrine notes:

As with all penalties in the Church, the purpose of an excommunication is "medicinal," that is, to bring about the repentance of the sinner. Repentance makes absolution from the excommunication possible (CCC 1463). If a person repents, the excommunication will always be lifted; but until this is done, he or she is barred from receiving even the sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation, and from all the other sacraments.

In other words, excommunication breaks your bonds to God and prevents you from receiving any of the sacraments until you repent of the sin. Other sins that incur automatic excommunication are apostasy, heresy, and the procuring or performing of an abortion or cooperation in an abortion that is necessary to its being performed. There are a variety of factors, such as ignorance, that may remove imputability.

There is a war in this world against life and it's good to see the Church again point out one of those attacks on life - the gift from God.

God bless,
Jay

Amnesty International is apparently planning to change it's position on abortion from a neutral stance to a pro-abortion stance. This means they would use their money and political power to actively try and overturn restrictions on abortion around the world. What a sad reflection of how Amnesty International is fallen.

A Catholic Bishop in Canada is fighting the change after Amnesty International in Canada already changed their stance somewhat. The vote to decide how they move forward will be taken in Mexico next year. In the meantime, you can find your local Amnesty International rep here and let them know your thoughts.

Remember, it only takes a couple of minutes to voice your opinion. Please take a few moments and express why an organization founded on the principles of protecting human rights must be pro-life. Those they may choose to ignore are the weakest among us and need the most protection.

God bless,
Jay

In a country that prides itself on its speed and efficiency I guess this one shouldn't surprise us. Planned Parenthood is taking a new approach to stopping the birth of children... Introducing the Express Care clinic! Now shoppers at suburban strip malls can get their contraception and family planning advice to go. It appears that they have finally resorted to a capitalist approach to solve their rapid decline in the pro-life battle. The article below mentions that the federal and state aid cuts for family planning services have forced Planned Parenthood to turn to self-sufficient clinics as a means of revenue.

The Express Care Clinics will not be performing abortions, but by incorporating spa services and massages they are attempting to attract a new audience to indoctrinate with their pro-contraception, anti-life gospel..and yes, they will be recommending abortion as an alternative to an "unwanted" pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood Opens Quick-Service Clinic

In Christ,
Joe

This article on abortions in New York stunned me:

For every 100 babies born in New York City, women had 74 abortions in 2004, according to newly released figures that reaffirm the city as the abortion capital of the country.

But it's not just New Yorkers that are being killed:

And abortions for out-of-town women performed in the city increased from 57 to 70 out of every 1,000 between 1996 and 2004, a subtle yet noticeable trend that experts say may reflect growing hurdles against the procedure in more conservative parts of the country.

These type of numbers should scare even abortion advocates. Almost half of all babies conceived in New York City were killed before they were born. What does this say about the decay and moral decadence of our culture? What does God think when a city kills almost half of the miraculous conceptions He creates there?

This article underlines one of the reasons for this - it's very slanted toward the pro-abortion position and seems to warn against the dangers of confirming Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. But despite this, we may be seeing the tide turn in the rest of the country because of "The Roe Effect": South Dakota banned almost all abortions earlier this year and Mississippi looks to be on the same path. I personally believe the new Supreme Court is likely to allow these laws to stand, which means the potential for this to spread is high (let's hope Georgia jumps on this list!). At one point Planned Parenthood (the biggest abortion provider in the country) estimated that 22 states were at "high risk" of banning abortion with a pro-life Supreme Court. Needless to say New York wasn't one of those!

Much prayer and work is needed to get more states to follow the path of South Dakota. We're finally beginning to imagine an America where the most vunerable of our society can't be killed at the will of another.

God bless,
Jay

Going along with my pro-life shopping posts, I found this pro-life shopping site that looks interesting. It's basically an affiliate site that donates a significant amount of each purchase to pro-life organizations. You can see who they support here.

Overall it seems to focus on smaller websites, but there's a lot of opportunity to do some good. So go check out Counter Click.

God bless,
Jay

Always room for love

This is the byline for a new website No Room for Contraception. It includes several fascinating articles on the problems with contraception and one I really liked: Nature has a Way to Plan Your Family. Contraception was condemned by every Christian church until the 1930's and only the Catholic Church has remained firm. Do you really believe God wanted Christians to use it but couldn't communicate that until 1930? Or is it more likely that we are moving further from Him with the continued shattering of the Christian community?

I have four small girls and I've been asked more than once "Don't you know what causes that?" My answer is always the same, "Yes, love."

God bless,
Jay

In my recent post, Wal-Mart as the World’s Biggest Abortion Provider?, I argued that we should not shop at Wal-Mart because they are selling the Plan B abortion pill (as Fr. Pavone’s conscientious objector). But Kaffinator made a great point in the comments:

Albertsons, Costco, K-Mart, Rite-aid, Safeway, Target, and Walgreens already offer Plan B. You are asking for a boycott on the last major pharmacy chain to have held out against Plan B pills. Are you saying you will boycott all of those stores as well?

Is it even possible to shop when you start banning companies because they sell this pill? And one friend even pointed out that the Birth Control Pill also causes abortions from time to time and virtually every pharmacy sells it (and lots of stores now have pharmacies). So how can we have a clean conscience about where we spend our money?

Well, some people are smarter than others and my friend’s mother called American Life League to get their opinion. They offered a two-part plan that turned out to be exceptionally good advice, so here’s my take on it.

Part A: Think Local
First, start with your local stores. Call the pharmacies of your local Wal-Mart, Costco, and grocery stores. Specifically ask them if they sell the Plan B pill. In my experience, you have to ask very directly and possibly more than once (the pharmacists are not eager to share their moral values with a stranger over the phone). If they don’t, then thank them politely for doing so and let them know you will be shopping there because of it. If they will sell it, let them know that you won’t be shopping at their store until they stop selling it.

But this isn’t enough, it’s important to take it to the next step. Write the store manager and copy the pharmacy and the corporate office to let them know you won’t be shopping at the store until they stop selling the Plan B abortion pill. Once you have a list of the stores that do sell it, write your local newspaper and your congressman. Tell your friends and family as well. In other words, make sure it is publicly known that this store sells the abortion pill (remember most people in the US are against abortion). And explain why contraception and abortion are so bad (also see more information here.

If they don’t sell it, I would recommend writing the corporate office and the manager as well, letting them know you will continue shopping there because of it. This is as important as protesting against the ones that do sell it.

Part B: Think Positive
The second thing to do is positively affirm the companies that do good. In other words, if you’re going to eat fast food, try to choose Chick-fil-a (except on Sunday) or Carl’s, Jr (bad ads, but they do support pro-life causes). If you’re having a beer, choose Coors (they give heavily to pro-life causes). Need to workout? Choose Curves (if you’re female). There are plenty of good companies out there, but it requires some research to find them. Also think locally. Even though we are going to have to shop at Wal-Mart, try to move some of your money to a local farmer’s market or small grocery store. We have a small pharmacy in a town near our home, for example. These small stores are more likely to be run by moral people (you should ask about Plan B, just in case) that don’t have corporate pressure to sell these things. I know there are grocery chains (not public companies) that adhere to a Christian moral outlook.

Tell your friends and family why you support these companies and why you are willing to drive a little further or pay a little more. This is the slow, steady way to win the race.

Conclusion: Shop your Conscience
Why do these companies feel secure in selling something has horrible as the Plan B abortion pill? Because they know most Americans are either too lazy or too cheap to do anything about it. They know we’ll keep shopping even if they sell abortion cheap. It’s time to draw a line in the sand and choose what you are willing to accept. I do believe we will be required to explain why we spent our money (a gift from God) the way we did. Can you spend it freely knowing (or wondering) if the pharmacy 20 feet away is helping to kill babies created by God?

Take action now. It’s almost too late.

God bless,
Jay

Watch out, Planned Parenthood, there's a new abortion provider in town and they tend to be the biggest at everything they do: Wal-Mart. The world's largest seller of toys is getting into the abortion business by selling the Plan B abortion pill. And they are proudly proclaiming it on their website (see the link).

One thing that really irks me is the name "emergency contraception" for these pills, which attempts to tie them back to contraceptives rather than abortificients. But make no mistake, these pills achieve only one purpose: the abort the baby after conception. In other words they provide you with a fast, cheap abortion without a doctor. Wal-Mart does like to lower prices on everything, I guess this is just an extension. Maybe no one has explained that this will help to kill future Wal-Mart customers? Maybe the giant seller of third-world sweatshop goods just doesn't care about people. I'm guessing employees (especially those without health insurance) would agree.

I have to admit that up until I read this we spent a good amount of money at Wal-Mart on groceries and other household items. However as of today I won't shop there. Period. I don't support Planned Parenthood and I have no plans to support Wal-Mart as it has now become the cheapest place to get an abortion. Sickening.

God bless,
Jay

PS - I'm sure someone will immediately suggest that these pills do not perform abortions. I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. Plan B causes abortions:

Those who promote "emergency contraception" omit facts and publish inaccuracies and half-truths, depriving women of their right to informed consent. The foremost claim is that ECs do not cause abortion and have "no effect on a pregnancy." To make this claim they have had to redefine "pregnancy" as beginning after an embryo has implanted in the uterine lining, and redefine "abortion" as terminating a "pregnancy." Terminating a human being's life prior to successful implantation is not counted. These word games are designed to obscure what ECs do, and to prevent state abortion regulations from applying to the destruction of embryos' lives by synthetic hormones. They also prevent conscientiously objecting health care personnel–doctors, nurses and pharmacists–from being able to cite state and federal "conscience clauses" on abortion in their own defense.

I must take a moment and applaud the state of South Dakota, which earlier this week banned all abortions in which the mother's life is not in danger. What a heroic move by the politicians of that state! May God bless them tremendously for being the first and taking the heat.

Also, congratulations to those who fought for years to get this passed. May other states follow in the path of South Dakota. It is our obligation to take up this fight in our individual states and save the lives of children who are simply inconvenient or unwanted. Abortion kills babies and - psychological studies show - significantly hurts the mental health of women. South Dakota deserves much praise for taking this courageous stand for life.

A quote from South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds:

In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them.

God bless,
Jay

Okay guys, time to pray hard. Pull out your rosary beads, lay prostrate before Christ in the Eucharist, and pray, pray, pray. The new Supreme Court has agreed to hear an abortion case. And it deals with the worst kind of abortion: partial-birth abortion. The case will decide whether it is okay for states to ban partial-birth abortions. It would be a great start on the road to ending the terrible holocaust of abortion.

Tell everyone else to pray as well - May God help us all.

God bless,
Jay

Abortion and contraception are essentially two sides of the same coin. In fact, abortion would not be possible without the change in how we view marriage that came from contraception. This article underlines this relationship:

Backed by abortion rights groups, three Massachusetts women sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, accusing the retail giant of violating a state regulation by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.

Those abortionists know they have to fight for contraception to save their skin! The first comment on this article is likely to be "but this article is concerning the morning after pill." However, as we've pointed out before the Birth Control pill acts as an abortifacient as well. So how can protestant groups protest the morning after pill but not the birth control pill? It isn't logical. Let's go back to before the 1930's when every Christian church condemned contraception . . . may God forgive us all.

God bless,
Jay

In this time of great charity giving (which is very important), I wanted to point out one organization that Christians should not be supporting: The United Way. Because of their name, most think this is a good charity organization, but United Way isn’t quite as good as you think.

The problem with the United Way is Planned Parenthood. For those not aware, Planned Parenthood is the single largest provider of abortion in the U.S. In other words, they kill more babies than any one else on an annual basis. They also oppose the right of conscience, which is the right of pro-life doctors and pharmacists to refuse to perform abortions or distribute abortion pills like the morning after pill.

Planned Parenthood is anti-Christian without exception. And The United Way is a supporter of Planned Parenthood.

At a national level, United Way often makes the claim that they do not support Planned Parenthood, which is technically true although not factually accurate. United Way is designed to push money to local offices, which then distribute it to organizations (this is how most of their money goes out). So when you look at the distribution list of the local offices, Planned Parenthood is a recipient of their money (see New York and Toronto for examples). In other words, when you give to the United Way, in some shape or form you are likely giving to the biggest abortion provider in America.

To add insult to injury, the New York United Way office even refers pregnant women to Planned Parenthood for abortion services under the misguided name of United Way CARES Program.

This alone is enough to remove the United Way from your giving list. There are many, many good agencies out there who don’t give to Planned Parenthood – please choose one of them for your charitable donations.

God bless,
Jay

My wife Krista and I, in an effort to educate and evangelize several Protestant couples that we know and love, have been thoroughly researching the topic of contraception. Contraception, as we have seen on this blog, is a pivotal issue for many, if not most, Protestants. Yet the wisdom of the Catholic Church on this crucial issue is hard to ignore or deny. I say crucial because this all-important matter deals with why the human person exists and, in essence, the meaning of real love. The following is an excerpt from Charles Rice's book 50 Questions on the Natural Law: What It Is & Why We Need It, I highly recommend this book (it is laid out in a question/answer format). Enjoy!

42. Why does the Church put so much emphasis on contraception? I think it enables people to exercise responsible free choice. Why does the Church oppose it?

In Humanae Vitae in 1968, Pope Paul VI said that the law of God prohibits “every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or means, to render procreation impossible”. This teaching “is founded upon the inseparable connection—which is willed by God and which man cannot lawfully break on his own initiative—between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning.” In Familiaris Consortio, John Paul stressed the “objective standards” that govern here as in other areas: “The Second Vatican Council clearly affirmed that when there is a question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives. It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his or her acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love.”

In his audience of Sept. 17, 1983, the Pope added to the above reasons the fact that the contraceptor usurps the role of God by making himself (or herself) the arbiter of when life begins:

At the origin of every human person there is a creative act of God. No man comes into existence by chance; he is always the object of God’s creative love. From this fundamental truth of faith and reason it follows that the procreative capacity, inscribed in human sexuality, is—in its deepest truth—a cooperation with God’s creative power.

It also follows that men and women are not the arbiters, are not the masters of this same capacity, called as they are, in it and through it, to be participants in God’s creative decision. When, therefore, through contraception, married couples remove from the exercise of their conjugal sexuality its potential procreative capacity, they claim power which belongs solely to God: the power to decide, in a final analysis, the coming into existence of a human person. They assume the qualification not of being cooperators in God’s creative power, but the ultimate depositaries of the source of human life.

In this perspective, contraception is to be judged, objectively, so profoundly unlawful as never to be, for any reason, justified. To think or to say the contrary is equal to maintaining that in human life situations may arise in which it is lawful not to recognize God as God.

A friend recently sent me an e-mail about a Laura Ingrahm interview with the president of the National Abortion Federation, Vicki Saporta. Apparently the end of the segment, Laura asked, "Vicki, do you think a woman's right to abort is the most important issue in America. By that, do you think that if a woman's right to abort is taken away then America will just fall apart?" Vicki replied, "Well.....Roe v. Wade gave women the right to their fertility. It gave them the right to decide when and if they wanted children. Women must have the right to contraception and emergency contraception and if those fail...abortion."

You don't think there is a connection between contraception and abortion? Think again. A review of the history of the contraception movement at the turn of the century (Emma Goldman, Margaret Sanger, etc.) reveals that it was originally the same thing as the abortion movement (both Sanger and Goldman were strong abortion advocates). Consider this quote from the Sacramento Bee in 1999: "'Clearly the pill was an absolute milestone and one of the biggest revolutions affecting women,' said Lynn Fielder,vice president of medical services for the Sacramento area's Planned Parenthood affiliate. 'It really was the century of birth control.'"

We can talk about the Onan passage in the Bible until we are blue in the face, but the fact remains that contraception was considered evil by every Christian for 1900 years until the mothers of the abortion movement convinced Protestants to abandon their morals. I repeat, Protestants accepted an agenda pushed on them by abortionists. Take a moment to consider that it was not a preacher, religious group, prophet, or the family next door that advocated the righteousness of contraception. It was and still is the ABORTIONISTS! Why is it that Orthodox Catholics are the only ones who can see this connection???? And why is it so surprising then that many Protestant churches have also abandoned their position on abortion. After all, the Bible doesn't specifically state that abortion is murder...

In the article referenced above, the impact of the pill was described thus: "Not only women's behavior was affected. By removing the fear of pregnancy from intercourse, the pill helped fuel the sexual revolution by making premarital and casual sex more prevalent, and ultimately, more accepted. Rutgers University anthropologist Lionel Tiger believes the pill may have actually contributed to an increase in single motherhood because many men assumed women were using it." How wonderful! The liberal left has no qualms about asserting the purpose and impact of birth control. All hail contraception. In the light of this obvious shamelessness (each of these purposes and effects being totally contrary to Christian morality), how is it that Christians could be led so far astray?

In Christ,
Dave

In addition to the comment posted by Jay, John C. Roberts has made the following comments on the record regarding abortion:

"We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." - Roberts, in a 1991 Supreme Court brief he co-wrote for the first Bush administration, while he was principal deputy solicitor general.

---

"The statement in the brief was my position as an advocate for a client." - Roberts, explaining the brief during his 2003 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination to a federal appeals court.

---

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. It's a little more than settled. It was reaffirmed in the face of a challenge that it should be overruled in the Casey decision. Accordingly, it's the settled law of the land. There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey." - Roberts, during the confirmation hearing, when asked for his own views on Roe v. Wade.

---

"I don't think it's appropriate for me to criticize it as judicial activism. ... My definition of judicial activism is when the court departs from applying the rule of law and undertakes legislative or executive decisions." - Roberts, during the confirmation hearing, on whether Roe v. Wade was judicial activism.

Roberts has distanced himself from pro-life comments on more tha