Maternity Homes and the Future of Abortion

Father Stefan Starzynski, Spiritual Advisor for the Paul Stefan Homes for Expectant Mothers, talks about the future of abortion, the conversion of a Texas Planned Parenthood Director and the impact of maternity homes.

For more information about the Paul Stefan Homes please visit www.paulstefanhome.org

Paul Stefan Home babies

Share

Showdown – Boycott Second Collection

This is the week that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development has approval from the US Bishops to solicit funds from parishes across America.  And it is a moment for all Catholics to say “No More!”

Previously, we wrote about the problems with CCHD and how Catholics should boycott the second collection that goes to support organizations that promote abortion, same-sex marriage and other things that run contrary to Church teaching.

We at the St. Michael Society have no idea why this second collection is still scheduled despite all of this controvery coming to light.  But, we hope that there is a good explantion.  And we stand by our plea to all of you to boycott this weekend’s second collection and to instead place a card that explains why you will not give your financial support to such an organization.

The following two videos are instructive on the specifics of CCHD and why Catholics cannot support it.

And here is the statement that we encourage Catholics everywhere to drop into the second collection basket this weekend. 

Join Our Mailing List
Email:


For Email Marketing you can trust

Share

Tyranny Through Health Care – The Final Prediction of Humanae Vitae

by Patrick Looby

20 years ago, Professor Janet E. Smith wrote an article entitled “Humanae Vitae: A Prophetic Document?” where she took a close look at Pope Paul VI’s predictions of what would happen in a society that embraced artificial contraception.  With all of the new technologies developed since that article was written, and the possibility that Health Care may come under government control, it is time to take another look at those predictions.

There is no doubt that Humanae Vitae is one of the most despised documents ever composed by a Pope. It seems that every time there is positive news about the Catholic Church, the media trips over itself to make a non sequitur mention of the “controversial” and “divisive” document that promotes an unselfish view of human sexuality and marital love, condemns the contraceptive and eugenic movements of modern society, and gives what has proved to be prophetic warnings about where society is headed if it embraces such movements.

The reason for this fixation on a 40 year old document – one that was summarily rejected by society even before it was formally promulgated – is that for over three decades it has been an accurate predictor of the social ills caused by our unwillingness to heed its simple warning – that a contraceptive culture will usher in a culture of death, whereby free people will eventually surrender themselves to tyranny.

We would do well then, to recall those predictions of Humanae Vitae, even though most of them have already taken hold in society. The hope is that we can hold back the inevitable – that perhaps we can begin to reverse the movement toward what will be the end of our American experiment and the beginning of what has been the fate of all the previous civilizations who were foolish enough to think they were ‘too big to fail.’

The First Prediction – “Infidelity and the general lowering of morality”

The public acceptance of artificial contraception would begin to cause the moral decay of society. The Church stated that the bodily pleasures of man are all tied to some higher good. The purpose of the pleasure is to guide human beings to obtain the good. And the seeking out of ways to enjoy the pleasure without the higher good always leads to excessive behavior and an eventual decline of morality.

The physical pleasure of eating, for instance, if separated from the higher purpose of nutrition leads to a society infected with health problems associated with such habits. Human sexuality, which provides even greater physical pleasure and also has the highest good of creation, if separated from its higher purpose would cause even greater problems for society – the first of which was predicted to be an increase in infidelity and promiscuity.

And so it has.

The biggest natural deterrent to infidelity, promiscuity, premarital sex, and the like is that sexual intercourse can create children that are the responsibility of the parents. Contraception gives the false hope (hardly a guarantee) that this need not be a worry, and people feel the freedom to seek out the pleasure for pleasure’s sake wherever and however they can.

Who can deny the fact that since the public acceptance of contraception human relationships have devolved into an embarrassing display of irresponsible animalism – not befitting a species equipped with the power of reason. From the 50% divorce rate, to the increase of promiscuity even among children, to the spreading of countless diseases, contraception has proven to be exactly what it was feared to be – not an answer to social problems, but the genesis of them. In our attempts to solve one problem, we have unleashed a Pandora’s Box of problems onto society – the effects of which plague children and the poor most especially.

And what is the next logical step for a culture that values contraception if that contraception fails to be effective? Since the creation of new life is now separated from the intention of those engaging in sexual intercourse, then whatever life is created is nothing but an unfortunate accident. There cannot be a contraceptive culture without there also being one that embraces abortion as the safety net.

The Second Prediction – Loss of Respect for Women

People are always amazed to learn that all of the early feminists who are now revered as revolutionaries were vehemently opposed to contraception and abortion. It was the eugenicists – and not the feminists - who were pushing for acceptance of contraception and abortion because eugenicists saw both as a means by which the undesirables of society could be controlled or even eliminated. In addition, the eugenicists in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were largely socialists who desired a class of workers who were ‘freed’ from domestic affairs.

Early feminists denounced such movements as just another attack on women. In fact, they feared that if abortion and contraception were accepted by society that women would become sexually enslaved to men, since there would be no way for wives to reasonably refuse the sexual advances of their husbands, and eventually men could look elsewhere to satisfy their sexual desires without fear of consequences if their wives did not submit.

And what reason could unmarried women give to reject the sexual advances of men if contraception and abortion were normalized? They feared that women would eventually be reduced to using their sexuality to get ahead in society since contraception would give men the ability to seek out sex without consequences.

The only reason abortion and contraception are now key elements of modern feminism is because socialist and population control advocate Lawrence Lader, who was struggling to help his eugenics movement find a voice, convinced a hesitant Betty Friedan – founder of the National Organization of Women (NOW) – to adopt abortion and contraception as a central tenet of neo-feminism in the late 1960′s.

This caused a rift in Friedan’s organization and only the women that sympathized with the socialist or eugenic agenda remained. The others quit and formed Feminists for Life of America in 1972. Unfortunately, FFLA could not compete with NOW’s propaganda machine which got a boost from its convenient partnership with the abortion industry. It is important to note that this unlikely partnership was yet another example of men exploiting the success of women. Lader and his eugenic ideas would have gotten nowhere in society if he had not convinced Friedan to go along.

The Final Prediction – Tyranny Through Population Control

At the time, critics of Humanae Vitae thought the claim that contraception could usher in an age of tyranny was about as far-fetched as one could get. How could something so personal and so seemingly reasonable wreak so much much havoc on society?

The greatest power given to humanity is the ability to create new life in an act of love, and then to raise that new life, passing on ones values, faith, and philosophy of life. This power is what builds up society to truly reflect the values of the people.   It is this power of procreation that is the final check and balance on a democratic government, for it is the people who literally create, raise and educate the very leaders they will freely elect to govern over society.

It is no wonder, then, that in every age we have seen governments that have sought to steal this procreative power away from the masses and wield it themselves – especially when that government does not share the values of the citizens it wants to control.

With technological advances in abortion, sterilization, cloning, mass vaccinations, and as of last week even the ability to create human sperm and eggs in the lab – eliminating even the need for human sexual reproduction – and with a population that has forgotten the goal of sexuality, the stage is set for any government with the right amount of power to completely subdue its citizens – and to do so without the bloody public spectacle that made previous attempts fail.

In fact, the only thing preventing our American government from being able to accomplish such a eugenic program is that our health care system is private. Even though it is regulated and in need of improvement, it remains an endeavor of the people, and these technologies are not under the control of those in power.  And it should stay that way in order to prevent the possibility of this last prediction of Humanae Vitae from becoming a reality.

The principle of subsidiarity, which has long been a tenet of Catholic social teaching, insists that “health care” is too broad of a power to be handed over to a federal government like ours.  Any technology, no matter how deadly or diabolical, can be brought under the umbrella of ‘health care’ and imposed on the public if it be the will of those in power.

It does not matter which side of the political spectrum you support. You may even be an ardent supporter of this current administration and trust in their intentions to bring health care under governmental control to accomplish good. But this is shortsighted. This would be a bell that cannot be unrung. Imagine the next administration, or perhaps one decades from now when our children or grandchildren are grown, that is not so trustworthy, and is tempted to bite the apple of ultimate control with so many technologies at their fingertips and the power to wield them to ensure their continuation of power.

People of every political and religious persuasion should resist the current movement toward a government controlled health care system.  What good is a democracy that continually votes itself out of power?

-  Mr. Looby is a graduate of Wadhams Hall Seminary and has been teaching Theology and Philosophy for 13 years.  In addition, he is a freelance writer and speaker on issues pertaining to the Catholic faith.

Share

What a Great Week!

by Patrick Looby

In the same week that Pope Benedict XVI warned against the rise of relativism in modern culture, American Catholics have quite a few reasons to gain hope from several examples of the Pope’s words in action.

First, Tuesday’s Election

It cannot be denied that Tuesday was a sweeping victory for conservatism and traditional values.  Maine defended marriage, VA and NJ elected what will hopefully turn out to be conservative and upstanding Governors (praying for ya, NJ!), PA elected several Pro-Life judges to their courts, and conservatives stood for principles over party and were able to get rid of some RINO baggage in NY-23 and send a message to the establishment that “Rs” will only get votes if they are also “Cs”

 

Second, Planned Parenthood Director Quits and Joins Pro-Life Group

By now you should all be aware of the fact that Abby Johnson, who was formerly a Director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in TX, resigned after a ‘change of heart’ and has now joined Coalition for Life!

 

 

 

Third, the Sinsinawa Dominican Sisters are FINALLY going to deal with  Sr. Donna Quinn (AKA the “Abortion Nun”)

Several months ago, Sr. Donna Quinn of the Sinsinawa Dominican Sisters was caught volunteering as an escort for an abortion clinic.  As you can imagine, this caused quite an uproar, but it seemed that her order was stalling any disciplinary action against her.

This week, it appears that stalling is over and the “Abortion Nun” is going to be dealt with appropriately.  This appeared on the order’s website this week.

Several months ago, the leadership of the Sinsinawa Dominicans was informed that Sister Donna Quinn, OP, acted as a volunteer escort at a Chicago area clinic that among other procedures, performs abortions. After investigating the allegation, Congregation leaders have informed Sr. Donna that her actions are in violation of her profession as a Dominican religious. They regret that her actions have created controversy and resulted in public scandal. They are working with Sr. Donna to resolve the matter appropriately.

Congregation leaders offer the following statement on behalf of members of the Congregation. We as Sinsinawa Dominican women are called to proclaim the Gospel through the ministry of preaching and teaching to participate in the building of a holy and just society. As Dominican religious, we fully support the teaching of the Catholic Church regarding the dignity and value of every human life from conception to natural death. We believe that abortion is an act of violence that destroys the life of the unborn. We do not engage in activity that witnesses to support of abortion.

 

Fourth, Rep. Patrick Kennedy Gets Put in His Place By Bishop Tobin

While NY-23 was taking care of RINOs, Providence Bishop Thomas J. Tobin was taking care of CINOs.  After requesting a meeting with Rep. Patrick Kennedy over his ridiculous tirade against Bishops who dared to voice objections to the public funding of prenatal murder, Bishop Tobin gave an interview to the Providence Journal and very clearly drew his line in the sand…

“…if someone is clearly and consistently and obstinately opposed to the church on something as serious as abortion — which again is a grave and intrinsic evil — then they really have to question their membership in the church and their participation in the life of the church.”

Weekly Scorecard:
Traditional Values – 4
Relativism – 0
Share

Abortion Czar via Health Care Bill?

The House Health Care Bill to be voted on in Congress this week essentially establishes former Kansas Governor, now Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius the Administration’s Abortion Czar with power to determine abortion funding.  While Governor of Kansas, Ms. Sebelius was considered one of the most pro-abortion Governors in the country, receiving abortion industry dollars for her campaigns and appearing at Planned Parenthood fundraisers.  Here is what the current health care bill to be voted on in the House this weekend says about abortion.

On line 17, p. 110, section 222 under “Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed” the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run plan. 

This is not only abhorrent it is in an inherent conflict of interest given the long relationship Secretary Sebelius has with the abortion industry.  We bet Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry can’t wait to have their fox guarding the henhouse.

Share

Final House Health Care Bill Plays Games On Abortion Funding

The manager ’ s amendment to H.R. 3962, the House health  care reform bill, has been posted on the Rules Committee website and can be viewed here .  The manager’s amendment does not contain any new language regarding abortion funding, so it remains true that the pending bill authorizes federal funding for abortion in the public option and subsidies for private insurance that includes abortion through affordability credits.  Although there is no new abortion funding language in the manager’s amendment, reports indicate that a “compromise” on abortion might still be attached to H.R. 3962 in order to garner the 218 votes necessary to pass the rule and the bill.  Groups should continue to urge Members of Congress to vote against the rule for considering H.R. 3962 unless a vote on the Stupak/Pitts amendment is allowed and to be wary of any compromise that falls short of the Stupak/Pitts amendment to permanently prohibit funding for abortions and plans that include abortion coverage.

buttonSpeaker Pelosi and other allies of the abortion industry in the House of Representative are doing every thing they can to payoff their abortion industry donors by essentially creating a new federal agency that will fund abortions on demand.  They know this is not popular and countless polls say so.  So what do they do – play parlaimentary and deceptive games and hope no one notices.  To be clear — any Representative voting for this rule will be voting to create a new abortion bureaucracy that uses government funds for abortion on demand. Please call your Representatives today — 202-225-3121 and tell them to vote no on the rule to proceed — this is key — voting NO on the rule to proceed is a vote against abortion funding and the creation of a new abortion federal agency. 

The schedule for House consideration of H.R. 3962 remains unclear.  Now that the manager’s amendment has been released, Congressional Quarterly is reporting that the bill could come to the floor on the night of Friday, Nov. 6. (Although a vote on the rule for consideration of the bill could take place before then.)  According to the National Journal, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said the “bill will get to the House floor by Saturday.  But he left open the possibility the House might not get to a final vote until early next week.”

The controversy over abortion funding is one of the few remaining issues that have not been resolved in the Democratic Caucus and there are likely to be continued efforts to propose “compromises” such as the language proposed by Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN).  Ellsworth issued a press release today outlining his proposal under which there would be no substantial changes to abortion funding in the bill.  In his plan, the government-run public health insurance option would still cover abortion, but would have to contract with private contractors to carry out the administrative functions related to paying for elective abortion.  In a press release (attached) Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) pointed out that this proposal creates a “distinction without a difference” and “amounts to the federal government taking out a ‘contract’ on the unborn.”  

Also, the Republican substitute was published tonight.  The Republican substitute contains provisions to make the Hyde amendment permanent by prohibiting government funding for elective abortion and subsidies for plans that cover elective abortion.

Share

House to Vote on Abortion Funding Bureaucracy Via Health Care This Week

Speaker Pelosi’s health care proposal to be introduced in the House this week creates a nationwide federal agency program, the “public option,” and explicitly authorizes that federal government program to pay for elective abortions (abortion on demand).  This new federal agency program will pay for elective abortions with federal funds, because that is the only kind of funds that a federal agency can spend. 

Therefore, any House member who votes for the procedure (the “rule”) that protects this language will be casting a vote that may define, for years to come, his position as being in favor of creating a federal program that will directly fund abortions. 

View National Right to Life Committee letter to Congress for more details.

http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCHouseLetteronHR3962.html

Share

Planned Parenthood Director Resigns After Watching Ultrasound of Abortion Procedure

A Texas Planned Parenthood director of eight years, Abby Johnson, called it quits after watching an ultrasound of an abortion procedure.  As prenatal technology continues to improve, it will become harder and harder for anyone to deny the remarkable development of the baby even at the earliest stages; and conversely, the violence that abortion does to the baby.  Most of all, we should attribute this conversion to the grace of God, who alone can change hearts.

Here is an excerpt from the local Texas news story:

I just thought I can’t do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that’s it,” said Jonhson.

She handed in her resignation October 6. Johnson worked as the Bryan Planned Parenthood Director for two years.

According to Johnson, the non-profit was struggling under the weight of a tough economy, and changing it’s business model from one that pushed prevention, to one that focused on abortion.

“It seemed like maybe that’s not what a lot of people were believing any more because that’s not where the money was. The money wasn’t in family planning, the money wasn’t in prevention, the money was in abortion and so I had a problem with that,” said Johnson.

Johnson said she was told to bring in more women who wanted abortions, something the Episcopalian church goer recently became convicted about.

“I feel so pure in heart (since leaving). I don’t have this guilt, I don’t have this burden on me anymore that’s how I know this conversion was a spiritual conversion.

Johnson now supports the Coalition For Life, the pro-life group with a building down the street from Planned Parenthood. Coalition volunteers can regularly be seen praying on the sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood. Johnson has been meeting with the coalition’s executive director, Shawn Carney, and has prayed with volunteers outside Planned Parenthood.

On Friday both Johnson and the Coalition For Life were issued temporary restraining orders filed by Planned Parenthood.

Rochelle Tafolla, a Planned Parenthood spokesperson issued the following statement: “We regret being forced to turn to the courts to protect the safety and confidentiality of our clients and staff, however, in this instance it is absolutely necessary.”

Praise be to God for Abby’s courage and conviction!  We must continue to pray for all of the doctors, nurses, directors, escorts and staff that aid in child-killing so that their hearts may be touched and moved to conversion like Abby’s was.  The mercy of God is infinite and His grace abounds even in the midst of great evil.

Share

The Odd Couple: Barack Obama and Planned Parenthood

Barack Obama is a well-spoken and well-educated man, and he also professes to be a student of history, which is why his affection for Planned Parenthood is so odd. During his campaign and more recently in his call to service, Obama repeatedly has supported and promoted the work of Planned Parenthood, and yet he seems unaware of or unconcerned with history of the organization.

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, an outspoken racist, who supported eugenics and Hitler. Sanger endorsed coercive sterilization for certain groups of society that she deemed inferior and unfit to procreate, including the mentally ill and African-Americans. In her writings, she boasts about speaking at a KKK rally, and she even outlines a plan to exterminate the black population. In Sanger’s mind, abortion and contraception were not simply ways of liberating white women but tools of oppression. How can President Obama, who has called for healing the racial divide in the U.S., condone the work of an organization with such a racist past?

Like other Planned Parenthood proponents, I imagine that the president would dismiss this legacy and argue that it is part of the organization’s past that has been left behind. But has Planned Parenthood really moved away from Sanger’s vision?

In 2008, UCLA pro-life students published the results of their undercover investigation of Planned Parenthood. They found multiple employees of the organization more than willing to accept financial contributions from students posing as white racists. In one conversation, the student tells the Planned Parenthood representative that she wants her money to be used specifically to fund the abortion of black babies, so that her children will not be disadvantaged by black kids and affirmative action. Rather than refusing the contribution, the Planned Parenthood worker actually tells the woman that she can absolutely designate that her donation be used for that purpose.

(See http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08022802.html for a full transcript of the conversation).

Several statistics appear to support the findings of the UCLA students. According to L.E.A.R.N. a national pro-life organization, 78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority communities, and a black fetus is 5 times more likely to be aborted than a white baby. In 2005, the CDC reported that 203,991 black Americans were aborted, while less than 200,000 African-Americans died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, diabetes, homicide, and chronic respiratory disease combined. Sanger may have passed away, but her dream continues.

 

If President Obama truly wants to help the poor and the oppressed and if he really wants to make racism part of our past and not part of future, then he needs to divorce himself from Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the relationship was built on ignorance or convenience. Either way, it needs to end. The work of Planned Parenthood has no place in an administration that wants to build a future based on unity and hope. Yes we can end abortion! Yes we can overcome our racist past! Yes we can change!

- Christopher GrossMr. Gross is a doctoral candidate in moral theology/ethics at Catholic University of America, and also holds a B.A. in political science and religion from Hampden-Sydney and M.T.S. from Harvard Divinity.

Share

Obama, The Gospel and Health Care

I had the oppotunity to attend daily Mass today at a large gathering for Catholic educators.  This was the part of the Gospel reading:

Jesus said to the crowds,
“When you see a cloud rising in the west
you say immediately that it is going to rain–and so it does;
and when you notice that the wind is blowing from the south
you say that it is going to be hot–and so it is.
You hypocrites!
You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky;
why do you not know how to interpret the present time?
(Luke 12:54-56, emphasis mine)

For the homily, the bishop focused in on those last two lines and reminded us that our job as educators is not merely to make students smart in the language of our disciplines, but to also give them the ability to “interpret the present time” – that is, to be able to have a kind of intelligence that alerts them when injustice, immorality, or irrationality are creeping in on society.  The purpose of education is not merely to be smart enough to get a job ‘someday’, but to be wise enough to be able to sense when people are taking advantage of you now, or are pushing an agenda that is contrary to good morality.

As he spoke, I could not help but think about all of the events happening in our government and how frustrating it is that we fail to interpret the times as we listen to the endless debate over health care.

Let’s look at some facts…

1.  President Obama and the other liberal Members of Congress are heavily funded by pro-abortion special interest groups.

2.  Special interest groups only heavily fund candidates that they think will further their cause once elected.

3.  Candidate Obama promised Planned Parenthood that his first actions as President would be to open more doors to the abortion industry.

4.  Every independent reading of the current health care bill results in the opinion that federally funded abortion is a possibility, which could result in a big payback to the special interest groups that heavily funded the campaigns of many liberal government officials.

5.  Obama and many others have INSISTED that federally funded abortion is not in the health care bill.

6.  Because of the disagreement about number 5, the bill is largely stalled because many Members of Congress (especially some notable Democrats) have called to amend the language to make sure that Obama’s promise of ‘no abortion funding’ is explicit and impossible to wiggle out of after it passes.

7.  Obama and the other liberal senators who are funded by pro-abortion groups refuse such language, citing that the bill already makes funded abortions impossible, and it would just complicate the bill.

8.  My reading of the situation tells me that this bill would pass much more quickly if he just allowed explicit language prohibiting abortion.

*************************

Now, I am not a rocket scientist (assuming that rocket scientists are better logicians), but something seems terribly wrong here.  As I see it, there are only a couple of possibilities.

Either Obama and the other liberals who are supported by the pro-abortion lobby are just die-hard linguistic purists who can’t stomach the idea of having a harmless redundant word or, two, added to any bill, EVEN IF it would mean that most of the resistance from his own party would melt away and he would be that much closer to passing the most important legislation of his presidency -

- OR, he CAN’T change the language because he knows that in actuality all of the people who say the bill will allow for federally-funded abortion are right, and changing it would mean another campaign promise to the abortion industry is down the tubes.

I know we can’t read hearts and minds.  But we are called to interpret the times, and we can do that by looking at past actions.  Having watched Obama govern over the past several months he has really been hands off on any specific language  - allowing senators and other groups take the lead on such things.  Which makes it seem strange that he steps in on a technicality.  “Do whatever you want, but please no redundant language.”  Seems odd to me.

In fact, the last time we saw him become such a stickler for simplistic language was when he was an Illinois State Senator opposing the Infants Born Alive Act.  There, he also cited redundancy as his motive in voting against it stating that federal law already applied in Illinois.

At least, that’s what he told voters in his national senate race who were dumbfounded by his resistance to such a reasonable law.  As we all know now, it turns out that was NOT his only motive at the time.  Jill Stanek has done a marvelous job chronicling what his real motives and thinking on the issue were.

Bottom line:  There are only two instances that I can find where Obama has claimed “redundancy” as his excuse for resisting language in a bill.  Both centered around abortion issues.  The last time he did so, we found out that he lied about the redundancy excuse, and was merely protecting his benefactors in the abortion industry.  The rhetorical question is “What about THIS time?”

Does it take a rocket scientist to figure this one out?  Are we really going to let our government pass a bill that provides unlimited funding of abortion in the name of “Health Care” – and do so while telling us they aren’t?

After hearing that Gospel today, I sure hope not.

- Patrick Looby

Share