Tag Archives: pro-life

Catholic’s Becoming Like Protestants?

In a recent article in Christianity Today the author explores the reasons why Pro-Life Protestants ignore the Annunciation.  It is a good question and it seems the answer is that the Annunciation is “too Catholic” .

I think that as a Catholic, we too are falling away from the importance of the Annunciation in our liturgy and theology.  The Annunciation is a Holy Day of Obligation.  It is just not a Holy Day of Obligation in the United States.  One of the many reasons why it is not a Holy Day of Obligation is because it is considered a “Marian Feast”.  Because it is considered a Marian Feast and that it always occurs during Lent, or in the Holy Week, the U.S. Bishops in 1887 decided not to include it as a Holy Day of Obligation.  However, throughout the Universal Church, not only is it a Holy Day of Obligation, it was also considered a Feast of Christ.

In any event, the Annunciation is not widely celebrated in the Catholic Church.  Why?  There are too many answers for that question, so I will pose another.  Why not?  Why not celebrate the Annunciation as if it were a Holy Day of Obligation.  There is little doubt about the powerful affect celebrating this Feast day would have in our Parishes:  Not only would we be celebrating the Paschal mystery of our Lord, but we would also be celebrating and educating our parishioners about the importance of God becoming man, Mary’s “yes” to be a mother unconditionally, and the upfront fact that from the moment of conception, one is a human being and is precious.

So let us start being Catholic, and celebrate the Feast of the Annunciation as if it were a Holy Day!   And maybe even bring a Protestant friend along as well.

Advertisements

Personhood Amendment: Winning the Abortion War Without Exception

Since 1973, many different tactics and approaches have been put forward by the Pro-life movement here in the United States.  I think it can be safely stated, that as far as these approaches and tactics have concerned making abortion illegal in this land, they have all been an unmitigated disaster.  37 years later, we are farther away from making abortion illegal in this country, and the more the years go by, the farther and farther away we go.  Can we really say that the approaches we have taken are even slightly successful, when there is still debate about whether taxpayer money should be used to kill the innocent?  The fact that it is still debateable should be a sign to all of us who deeply care about the unborn, that what we have been doing to accomplish our goal is not working.

So what needs to change you ask?  I think the only approach that will finally and once and for all end the killing is a constitutional amendment granting “personhood” to all from conception to natural death.  However, this idea of a personhood amendment is not new.  In 1974 a New York Senator named James Buckley brought a human life amendment to the Senate, and a quick search on this topic shows that 12 other human life amendments have been presented to Congress from 1973-2003.

The most outspoken proponent for a “Personhood” Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is Jude Brown of the American Life League.  Jude Brown has been at the forefront of the Pro-Life movement since before Roe v. Wade became the desecration and abomination of the land.  Mrs. Brown has on many occasions clearly articulated the reasons why a personhood amendment is the only way to win the abortion war going on in this country.  In this article, Mrs. Brown further states the reasons as why the amendment process is the only way to proceed at this point.  Further, and more to the point, Mrs. Brown discusses the reasons why allowing exceptions to our cause, has doomed us to failure.  We cannot allow “exceptions”, such as the “health and well-being of the mother” or “in cases of rape or incest”, to be used any more in pro-life speak.  Those “exceptions” are not Pro-Life!  We are being hypocrites when we say that abortion is wrong, but it is okay in these instances.  We must now take a firm inventory of ourselves and the pro-life movement and decide what we really want.  Do we want to limit abortion?  Or do we want to end abortion?

As Catholics we are all called to end abortion.  Limiting abortion may sound good in practice and at cocktail parties, but in reality, innocent life is still being murdered, and mothers womb’s are still being ripped apart.  We must do all we can to end the horror.

So, can a personhood amendment achieve the end to abortion?  I believe it is the only way we can win the war.  But, we won’t win with the “exception” mentality.  As mentioned above, Sen. Buckley’s amendment in 1974 was the first human life amendment proposed in the Senate.  The “exceptions” were of course debated at that time.  The cardinal from Boston,Humberto Cardinal Medeiros, made the following statement at the time:

“As for an amendment which would generally prohibit abortion but permit it in certain exceptional circumstances, such as when a woman’s life is considered to be threatened, the Catholic Conference does not endorse such an approach in principle and could not conscientiously support it.”

Interestingly enough, and despite the good Cardinal’s reiteration of Catholic teaching, guess what was in Sen. Buckley’s human life amendment?  You got it, an exception to abortion in the case of the life of the mother!  If you look at the other 12 proposed human life amendments, most, if not all, had language providing “exceptions” to abortion.  Is it any surprise that none of these proposed amendments had any success?

The pro-life movement needs to unite around this personhood amendment strategy in order finally and forever, defeat the culture of death.

I am well aware that the majority of Americans support abortion; either outright, or within one or more of the “exceptions”, but that should not matter when trying to prevent an abhorrent evil.  We cannot compromise with evil, lest we condone evil ourselves.

It is my belief that we are not winning, or even on the verge of winning this war, because too many good people in the pro-life movement have bought into this incrementalist approach that allows exceptions to abortion or worse, abortion itself, because the legislation may limit abortion in some unforeseen way.

These good people also believe that taking the “all or nothing” approach is too extreme and too hard a fight to see any results.  However, what results have we seen with the current approach?  In 37 years there have been over 40 million abortions in this country!  It is plainly obvious we need to reorganize our attack and focus all of our efforts on promoting and passing a Personhood Amendment that would protect all life from beginning to natural end.

To that end, California is in the process of gather petitions to place a Personhood Amendment on the November 2010 ballot.  Please go to this website for further information: http://www.californiahumanrightsamendment.com/

The Tiller Murder is a Blow to the Pro-Life Movement

The murder of the notorious Abortionist, George Tiller, on Sunday, was a horrific and violent event.  The killing of a human being, without justification, is always wrong, regardless of who that person might be, or what that person does for a living.  In my opinion, Dr. George Tiller was a murderer.  However, Dr. Tiller murdered those babies, (some say 60,000 by his hand alone!) within the confines of the law; meaning he acted legally, and therefore he did  not actually commit murder, under the legal definition of murder  in the United States.  Therefore, any violent or forcible act to prevent him from performing more abortions would be unjust and immoral.

Most of us in the pro-life movement, understand this; we would never commit a violent act upon anyone to achieve our goals of ending abortions by making them illegal, and unwanted.  We know and understand that the only way to stop abortions is to ask God for forgiveness and mercy, and pray in the name of Jesus Christ and His Most Holy Mother Mary, to change the hearts of those seeking and performing abortions.  We understand that our goal to end abortions in the world will not be accomplished by anything we do, but will be accomplished by God in His mercy.

The murder of Dr. Tiller, I believe, is a tragic blow to the pro-life movement as a whole.  Just by watching the news the last few days, once again, the pro-life movement is now categorized as a lunatic, terrorist group, whose modus operandi is to commit violent acts and murder.  This at a time in the pro-life movement, when after the 2008 election we were at our lowest point, and more recently when the most prestigious Catholic university in America, Notre Dame, honored the most pro-abortion President ever in Barrack Obama, this murder takes us further away from our goal than we have ever been.  Although a recent poll showed that people identifying themselves as pro-life to be the majority for the first time since polls were taken in this area, a closer inspection of the polls does not support this finding.  51% of those polled identified themselves as pro-life, yet 76% stated that abortion should be legal either in all or limited circumstances.  That does not sound pro-life to me.  So with this backdrop, this murder may only further dilute our message of respecting life at all stages.

And not surprisingly, the media is now bent on showing Dr. Tiller as the martyred saint for the pro-choice crowd.  Dr. Tiller, far from being a saint, was an opportunist at best, and a murderer at worst.  But now, with his murder, the “high ground” that had been ours for years (at least the last 10 years), is now with the pro-abort gangs, because of the murder of their fallen hero.

To make matters worse, the media is also attempting to connect statements made by pro-life leaders, such as the Catholic Bishops, and conservative television hosts, like Bill O’Reilly, to place blame for the murder of George Tiller at their feet because they had the gall to speak out and say that what George Tiller was doing was murder.  Never mind the fact that none of these people ever abdicated violence or suggested in any way that violent acts be committed to stop the abortions. But that doesn’t matter to a media whose pro-abort views are clearly seen in their reporting of stories and in their editorial comments.

So where does that leave the Pro-Life movement?  First, we should speak loudly and forcefully that we do not condone any violent acts to achieve our goals; that violence is exactly what we are attempting to stop.  Second, we must continue to be vigilant in exposing the “falseness” of the “pro-choice” movement, by standing up for the truth, that all life is sacred from its beginning to its natural end.  And third, we must pray…and pray…and pray…

JUNO; Accidentally Pro-Life?

juno_l200712201428The film, Juno, is a movie I have been wanting to see since it hit the theatres in late 2007.  At that time it received all the Oscar buzz associated with much larger budgeted films.  I waited to watch the film because it had received so much attention from the pro-life world, that I wanted to watch it when all the furor had died down.  Well, I probably waited longer than I should have, but I did finally get around to watching it last night, and I was sure glad I did.

Briefly, Juno is a sixteen year old girl living in a Minnesota suburb with her father and step-mother (her mother abandoned her and moved to Hawaii and started a new family there) and five year old half sister.  Her best friend Leah, is a cheerleader, although it becomes obvious that the two of them are definitely not in the “in” crowd at school.  Her other best friend, is a boy in her class who also is a “track and field enthusiast”.  Paulie Bleeker (Bleeker)  is a long distance runner, and is probably best categorized as a “geek”, but Juno sees something in him that she is unsure about, but by the end of the film, she realizes that what she sees in him is love.

But I am getting ahead of myself.  The film starts with Juno and Bleeker having a very awkward and quick, sexual encounter, in a chair.  Shortly, we learn that Juno is pregnant.  Juno decides, after series of encounters, not to have an abortion, but to have her child and to give the child up for adoption.  Juno, with the help of Leah, find a couple looking to adopt in the PennySaver.  Juno and her father meet the couple, along with their lawyer, in perhaps one of the funniest scenes of the movie.  By  the end of the film, Juno not only gives birth to her child, but she also learns a lot about relationships and love.  

 Juno is definitely a film that finally promotes a pro-life position, but the film itself is not necessarily pro-life.  I loved Juno, and not just because Juno didn’t choose to have an abortion.  I loved the film because it was funny and serious, it is weird and realistic, and it has a fantastic soundtrack.  Juno is a beautiful, quirky film, with tremendous acting and fantastic writing.  While in the film, God is never mentioned, nor is any religious theme introduced into any of the characters, the fact that Juno decides to carry her baby full term and to “give up” her baby for adoption, is the kind of self-less, loving act that we need to see more of in film and in the written word.  Whatever the political, or religious views of the writer or director, Juno comes out strong in showing that having a child is more than just “me” and that  killing that life is just not an option.  I highly recommend Juno to all.