Is MSNBC anti-Catholic? Suppressing Religious Freedom?

The public attacks on the Catholic Church by Rhode Island Representative Patrick Kennedy, and Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin’s defense of the faith and prayerful concern for Mr. Kennedy, have drawn the fire from the center left and its allies in the media.  SMS has written a few times about this conflict, most recently yesterday, when the Bishop responded to yet another public attack on the Church from Mr. Kennedy.

MSNBC has worked hard for years to be the anti-Fox — the network that appeals to the center-left of American society just as Fox News appeals to the center right.  SMS will leave it to media analysts to determine if that strategy is working or failing, but the latest attacks by four prominent MSNBC Talk Show Hosts suggests that MSNBC is not just anti-conservative, it is fanning the flames of anti-Catholicism. 

The latest rants and attacks by Chris Matthews and Lawrence O’Donnell, which are a follow-on from MSNBC’s Nancy Synderman, who suggested the IRS should investigate the Catholic Church, and MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan who launched a vicious attack on pro-life Catholic Cathy Ruse, suggests an emerging theme undermining the American tenet of religious freedom and clearly walking the line of anti-Catholicism. 

The Media Research Center did a good piece of reporting here on Synderman’s call for the IRS investigation.  And the Culture and Media Institute had this report about Ratigan’s attack on Family Research Council’s Cathy Ruse. 

Appearing yesterday morning MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” left wing attack man O’Donnell commented on the Kennedy-Bishop Tobin dispute: 

“This is a political act by a political bishop… Political bishops do the church absolutely no good. This guy’s—this bishop is a political hack.”

Maybe we can chalk up O’Donnell’s comment as standard form from a left wing radical who tees off on anyone to the right of Karl Marx.  But when we go to the tape of the interview between Chris Matthews and Bishop Tobin, MSNBC’s vitriol is both clear and portends a disdain for Catholicism and the fundamental principle of religious freedom.  As you will see Matthews is not interviewing the Bishop, he is ranting, disrespectful, interruptive and clearly trying to intimidate the Bishop from speaking publicly about matters of church and state, very similar to the interviews conducted earlier in the month by Synderman and Ratigan.

But you can judge for yourself.  SMS features below a two part video of the Matthews interview with Bishop Tobin.   

Matthews/Bishop Tobin Interview Part One:

Matthews/Bishop Tobin interview-Part 2

The anti-Catholicism charge is a serious one, and Matthews is a Catholic, but the latest solvos by MSNBC Program Hosts – Synderman, Ratigan, Matthews and O’Donnell — most certainly seek to undermine the fundamental principle of religious freedom through intimidation, and in our view walk right up to the line of fueling the flames of anti-Catholicism.

But then again, is anyone watching MSNBC?

For those interested in contacting MSNBC President, Phil Griffin, about the anti-Catholic positioning of his network you can call or write at:

Phil Griffin, President, MSNBC, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112  PH: 212-664-4444

Join Our Mailing List
Email:


For Email Marketing you can trust

Share

Pro-Aborts in Full Damage Control Mode; Attack Catholic Church

The abortion industry is in full damage control mode after Saturday’s vote in the House passing the Stupak Amendment, which makes sure that no government money funds abortion. It passed the House with 240 bi-partisan votes, which is 20 more votes than what the overall healthcare passed with.

 NARAL Pro-Choice America president Nancy Keenan and Catholics for a Free Choice president Jon O’Brien took to the pages of Politico today to lash out against the country’s Catholic bishops and their supposed “double standard.”

 Nancy and Jon are clearly grasping at straws in their attack on the Catholic bishops. Here’s their op-ed below with our comments in red. Enjoy.

  Thomelogohe Catholic bishops’ double standard
By: Nancy Keenan and Jon O’Brien 
November 10, 2009 05:28 PM EST

 As advocates for reproductive health, we are outraged at what transpired in the House over the weekend.

 Translation: We want Americans to pay for abortions and we are livid that pro-lifers voted to make sure women pay for their own abortions.

 The passage of the Stupak-Pitts amendment goes far beyond the status quo on abortion restrictions and would make it nearly impossible for insurance plans in the new system to offer abortion coverage. 

 Actually, the Stupak-Pitts amendment put back the status quo on abortion restrictions into the healthcare bill – otherwise the bill would have blown the status quo out of the water by allowing the federal government to pay for abortion on demand.

This campaign succeeded in large part because its supporters perpetuated falsehoods about abortion coverage in the new system. 

 Why must the abortion industry continue to outright lie when it comes to this? I mean, doesn’t it get old once even liberal media outlets are proving you wrong? See the FactCheck.org article here, the TIME mag article here and the AP story here. FactCheck says: “Despite what Obama said, the House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans.”

Most notably, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and its allies in the House distorted the facts about the health reform proposal by claiming that the proposed system would have used federal dollars to cover abortion care. They’re wrong. 

 See comment above. No, Nancy & Jon – you and everyone perpetuating your myths are wrong.

The original House bill included a compromise that required all plans to separate public and private dollars in the new system — ensuring that no tax dollars would ever cover abortion services. 

 Sure they did and it’s called the Capps Amendment which is a bookkeeping scheme and phony compromise. First, the amendment was written by staff to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Ca.), and offered by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Ca.), both of whom have 100 percent pro-abortion career records. Secondly, the Capps Amendment explicitly authorizes the federal government to pay for abortions and those that sign up for the public plan will be charged an “abortion surcharge.”

In fact, the bishops should be familiar with this arrangement because it reflects the same principle of separation that guides their financial interaction with the federal government. The bishops have a long history of almost unlimited access to enormous quantities of federal funding. When it comes to funding for Catholic schools and hospitals or programs run by Catholic Charities, they accept federal funding with open arms. The bishops never question their own ability to lawfully manage funds from separate sources to ensure that tax dollars don’t finance religious practices. 

 Catholics hold that a government-run “anything” should only be considered as an absolute last resort. We believe in subsidiarity - that the government shouldn’t take away from individuals what they (the individuals) can accomplish “by their own enterprise and industry.” (Pope Pius XI). Catholic Charities does great work, work that cannot be done if the government itself were handling. In fact, there is great risk to individual freedom once the government takes over something.

 Yet they reject the idea that others could do the same. This is the very definition of hypocrisy. 

 And you think that the government will siphon out funds and make sure Americans don’t pay for abortions? Are you serious?

For example, Catholic hospitals depend on federal funding. Indiana has 35 Catholic hospitals and 26 other Catholic health-care facilities. In 2007, 58 percent of patients who visited these facilities were covered by Medicaid or Medicare, a proportion reflected across the country. With well over half of their revenue coming from the government, it is safe to say that Catholic hospitals survive on government funding as well as contributions from private sources. 

Here’s where you both really took a wrong turn. One in six patients in the US is cared for in a Catholic hospital and you know where poor patients are sent who don’t have insurance? To a Catholic hospital. You fail to mention that the Senate bill lacks any sort of conscience protections for doctors and other healthcare professionals who decline to perform or refer for abortions – that’s because you want to force all doctors to perform abortions or don’t even become an ob-gyn, right? In a recent survey of faith-based physicians, when asked if they would do abortions or quit their jobs if the government forced them to make that decision, 95% said they’d quit. What if Catholic hospitals are forced to close or rather than perform abortions? Who will care for the hundreds of thousands of patients then? Some doctors have something to say about that here.

Catholic Charities, the domestic direct service arm of the bishops, also depends on state and federal dollars. Sixty-seven percent of Catholic Charities’ income comes from government funding. That represents over $2.6 billion in 2008 — an amount that is more than three times as large as the next largest charitable recipient of federal funds, the YMCA. Just as Catholic hospitals do, Catholic Charities receives enormous quantities of government dollars while abiding by existing constitutional and statutory requirements that prevent government sponsorship of religion. 

 What does this have to do with anything? Planned Parenthood gets hundreds of millions of dollars a year from taxpayers.

The bishops know that a vast majority of Americans, including Catholics, disagree with their hard-line dictates regarding reproductive-health care, including the bishops’ opposition to contraception.

 That is what the Catholic Church believes and has passed on through the centuries. It’s not a matter of debate. Accept that they have a different view than you both and move on.

However, when it comes to health care reform — from which many millions of people will benefit — the bishops injected divisive politics into the process and overran a compromise that would have guaranteed that no federal dollars would cover abortion care. 

 1) Rory Cooper at Heritage says that The U.S. Conference of Bishops has every constitutional protection under the first amendment to petition their government, without fear that the head of the Progressive Caucus will use the IRS to intimidate them, or call them “bullies.” 2) There is no compromise on federal funding of abortion – the government either funds abortion or it doesn’t. There never was a compromise that the bishops overran.

As this debate moves forward, U.S. senators and the public should challenge the bishops’ hypocrisy. If separation of federal funds and private dollars works for the church hierarchy, then it should also work for women’s reproductive-health care. 

 Catholics are called to live their faith in every area of their lives and government is no different (see Bishop Tobin’s  smackdown of Patrick Kennedy when politicians fail to do this in the public square). It’s the job of the Catholic bishops to lead and educate Catholics. U.S. Senators should be listening to their constituents – the majority of whom oppose government funding of abortion and who oppose a government takeover of healthcare overall.

Nancy Keenan is president of NARAL Pro-Choice America and Jon O’Brien is president of Catholics for Choice.

 © 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC 

Join Our Mailing List
Email:


For Email Marketing you can trust

Share

Abortion Supporters Plotting Revenge

There are two stories that we are closely monitoring for you today. President Obama and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) reminded us quickly we are far from ultimate victory and the fight for life has only just begun.

buttonLast weekend, prolifers achieved quite an accomplishment by rallying 240 Members of Congress that voted to include the Prolife Stupak-Pitts Amendment to the House’s version of the Healthcare Bill. The merits of the Stupak-Pitts vote and amendment is the topic of numerous debates and you can read our opinion at the Sorting Through the AM Buzz Post

President Obama and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) are plotting revenge.  In the publication Politico today Woolsey co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus gives a not-so-veiled threat to turn the IRS against the Catholic Bishops while admitting that Bishops are within their rights to speak out on legislation.

“The IRS is less restrictive about church involvement in efforts to influence legislation than it is about involvement in campaigns and elections. Given the political behavior of USCCB in this case, maybe it shouldn’t be.” 

In Roll Call the President revealed that he already wants to change the abortion language in the final House Bill.

President Barack Obama told ABC News on Monday night that he wanted to change the language in the final House bill so that “neither side feels that it’s being betrayed.”

We’ll continue to monitor the situation and update you if action is required.  In case you were about to Google “Woosley”:

Washington DC Office:
2263 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
Ph.:  202-225-5161
Fax: 202-225-5163
 
District Offices:
 
Marin Office:
1050 Northgate Drive
Suite 354
San Rafael, CA. 94903
Ph.:  415-507-9554
Fax: 415-507-9601
 
Sonoma Office:
1101 College Avenue
Suite 200
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Ph.:  707-542-7182
Fax: 707-542-2745
Share

It’s Far From Over – Subsidiarity, The Bishops and Health Care

by Patrick Looby

It is a fundamental principle of social philosophy, fixed and unchangeable, that one should not withdraw from individuals and commit to the community what they [individuals] can accomplish by their own enterprise and industry.” – Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno

On September 29, I wrote about the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, warning that Catholics need to be careful about focusing just on the single issue of abortion  in their objections to Obamacare, instead of focusing on the bigger problem of the public option which makes all other evils possible.

As long as it is a government-controlled public option, then any prohibition of abortion (or any evil) is illusory anyway.  Any so-called guarantee we get that abortion will not be included is only as good as the next election, or the next round of Supreme Court appointments.  (Remember – we live in a country where the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness co-exists with the right to kill your unborn child)

While it was quite an accomplishment to obtain a bipartisan prolife majority, 240 votes for the pro-life Stupak-Pitts Amendment prohibiting federal dollars from paying for abortion in health care, prolifers are right to realize that the Stupak amendment is likelty to get scrapped in conference.  In the end, Pelosi needed to allow some type of no-abortion funding measure to pass in order to have a chance at getting the broader bill through.  Pro-life leaning, vulnerable Democrats, and a handful of blue dogs made it clear to her they needed to be able to go home and say they voted against abortion funding in health care.  The good news is, unlike the phony Capps and Ellsworth Amendments, Stupak does have teeth, but those teeth are likely to get pulled in conference.    

So if the US Bishops don’t clarify the Catholic position on subsidiarity as it relates to this debate, then this chess move on the part of Pelosi may just work, and we will be looking at socialized medicine.  For it is the public option in the bill that is the most dangerous part, as it makes all things possible.

As Father David Bosnich clearly wrote back in the 1990s when the Clintons tried to take over the health care system, subsidiarity is one of the key tenets of Catholic social teaching, stating “that nothing should be done by a larger or more complex organization that can be done by a smaller and simpler organization.”  Back then, Catholics felt the same frustration when the US Bishops seemed to focus only on abortion in the HillaryCare debate, and were not being clear that centralizing governmental control of social programs like health care was also contrary to Catholic teaching, because it opens the door to abuse of power and enslaves mankind to a welfare state mentality.

Just about every pope in the last 150 years has warned against the modern movement toward welfare states.  Overreliance on the government makes man into a slave of the state as it turns off his inner drive to be self-sufficient and responsible for his actions.

Even with good motives on the part of politicians, the temptation is just too great to increase people’s reliance on the government, for it creates powerful voting blocks of people who now must continue to vote for politicians who promise to maintain their way of life.  One’s livelihood and happiness is no longer dependent on individual productivity in the community, but on the button that is pressed in the voting booth.  “Why work for what I need, when I can just vote someone in who will give it to me free of charge?” becomes the mentality in a welfare state that has continually violated the principles of subsidiarity.

In fact, the abortion debate is nothing more than an indication of the problem of government run health care.  The fact that milions of Americans were glued to c-span hoping there would be enough votes to prohibit their tax dollars from paying for elective abortion should be enough for anyone to understand the principle of subsidiarity.  That experience of being powerless is what happens when we unnecessarily surrender power to the state.

We haven’t even had the debate on whether or not our public insurance plan will consider feeding tubes as ordinary or extraordinary care.  (Remember Terri Schaivo?)   Or whether or not homosexual partners will be given a family plan.  Or whether or not sterilization will be covered as birth control.  Or whether embryonic stem cell therepy will be covered.  etc. etc. etc.

All of these issues, and plenty we haven’t even thought of because the technology is not developed yet, will be left to a political vote.  We will not have any consumer power in determining what is acceptable in society, but will be at the mercy of whichever political philosophy has the majority in government.

Thomas Peters at American Papist, and Raymond Arroyo expressed the same concern that the bishops have not been more outspoken against the public option.  It almost appears to be a replay of the 1990s. 

However, the difference between now and the 1990s is that we have had some courageous bishops who have written against this assault on freedom.  But, what we need desperately as this debate moves on to the Senate, is a unified statement from the conference against this government takeover of health care.

-  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

Sunday’s Catholic Action Items

Two very important Catholic Action items for this Sunday involving boycott of second collection and Catholic Bishops campaign kick-off to keep abortion funding out of government health care plans. http://bit.ly/4oxmC3 http://bit.ly/4oeD8f

Share

Caught on Tape: Kennedy Rips Church for Opposing Health Bill Over Abortion Funding

Patrick Kennedy: Catholic Church Fanning ‘Flames of Dissent and Discord’ by Opposing Health Bill Over Abortion Funding

Rhode Island Democrat Patrick Kennedy

 CNS News caught up with Rhode Island Democrat Representative Patrick Kennedy and asked him about abortion and health care reform.  Here is their story….  

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I) told CNSNews.com that the Catholic Church is doing nothing but fanning “the flames of dissent and discord” by taking the position that it will oppose the health-care reform bill under consideration in Congress unless it is amended to explicitly prohibit funding of abortion.

Read full story and see video.

Share

Bishops Defend Marriage Against Attacks

As I was preparing a write-up on the US Bishop’s plan to issue a document in defense of marriage, many people asked me if this was even needed.  With Health Care, the housing crisis, the economic downturn, and the situation in the Middle East, is there really a need to start shadowboxing over every issue?

As it turns out, the Bishop’s document on marriage just may arrive on the scene at the right time as the Obama’s Administration theme - ‘Never waste a good crisis’ – continues to produce attacks on some very fundamental levels of society.

Last week, CNSNews.com reported on an event co-sponsered by none other than the NEA called “Getting Sex Education Right in America.”  One of the main discussion points during the event was the unfortunate fact that for too long now our schools in America have pushed a “heterosexual marriage agenda” where kids are programmed to think  that monogomous, heterosexual marriages are the way in which humans can grow up happy and healthy.  This, they say, is “obnoxious and harmful” programming  that has discriminated against homosexuals and other teens who want to live alternative lifestyles.

Now, we have been hearing this sort of drivel from the NEA for years, but the problem gets a little more complicated when the president hand-picks a person to be the Safe Schools Czar who happens to have the exact same beliefs.  If you haven’t heard about him already, then let me introduce you to Kevin Jennings - the person Obama thinks is best suited to keep our school children safe…

 
Yes, you heard that correctly.  Obama’s Safe School Czar, the man hand-picked to ensure that we have safe schools in America, believes that our curriculum is designed to trick people into being heterosexual.  When you couple this with the NEA’s belief that monogamy and marriage promotion is “obnoxious and harmful” then the stage is definitely set for a battle over morality in schools.

Unfortunately, that is not the only assault on marriage.  In a little under two weeks, Maine will be the latest state to take up the marriage issue on a ballot that could prevent same-sex marriages.  It shouldn’t surprise anyone that same-sex marriage advocates see the Catholic Church as the biggest obstacle to their movement.  This is confirmed by the fact that they have decided to subtly play the Catholic card in their ads against traditional marriage.  Here is the latest example…

 

Notice the subtle mention of her being a lifelong Catholic just prior to her public support of something that is about as contrary to Sacramental Theology as you can get.  Given all of the above, we are obviously in for battle over marriage in this country.

Enter the US Bishops…

Earlier this month, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops released a draft of a pastoral letter on marriage that they plan to discuss and officially issue at their annual meeting this fall.  After having read the draft, I must say that it is a breath of fresh air to see such a clear and thoughtful defense of marriage, and one that is intended to be read by everyone and not just people with advanced degrees in Theology.  It equips all Catholics with the tools to defend against many of the assaults on marriage that we now find coming from our government.

the future of humanity depends on marriage and the family.”

The letter brilliantly makes the connection between all of the previous attacks against marriage and how they have led us to this crucial moment where we face the ultimate redefinition of marriage in accepting so-called same-sex marriages.

After dealing extensively with issues such as contraception, divorce, and even cohabitation with direct yet pastoral clarity, they conclude that “reflecting losses in the understanding of the purposes of marriage… couples more readily treat as separate the decision to get married and the decision to have children.” This redefinition of marriage produces trends to accept things such as so-called same-sex marriages.  This, the say “indicates a mentality in which children are not seen as integral to a marriage but are seen as an afterthought” producing damaging consequences for children, couples, their marriage and eventually all of society.

The result is that people approach marriage as an individualistic endeavor instead of seeing its relation to the good of all society.  The “me” mentality that is perpetuated in a growing welfare state has now infected even the most sacred institutions.

One of the best points of the letter, then, is pointing out how the current attacks on marriage are indeed a redefinition of it.  A selfless giving of oneself to another with the purpose of unifying male and female in an act of procreative love and producing an environment for the upbringing and education of children, is the polar opposite of the individualistic expression of sexual pleasure, with children as an afterthought, that has become the norm for the modern thinking on marriage.  Clearly, the Bishops say, if the former is your idea of marriage then, by definition,  there can be no such thing as same-sex marriage.  But, if the latter is your idea of marriage, then same-sex marriage (and a whole lot more) is  not only possible, but seems to be called for in the name of justice.

So, this is very much a war of philosophies, and we are right to insist that marriage is being redefined by these attacks.  So, while people with same-sex attractions are “to be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity,” this does not demand a redefinition of marriage.

As the bishops conclude… “Today, advocacy for the legal recognition of same-sex relationships is often equated with non-discrimination, fairness, equality, and civil rights. However, it is not unjust to oppose legal recognition of same-sex relationships, because marriage and same-sex unions are essentially different realities.”

To read the full draft of the Bishop’s letter, go here.

- Patrick Looby

Share

US Bishops: Ready to Oppose Healthcare If Principles Aren’t Met

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USSCB) made it crystal clear today that current healthcare legislation does NOT mean their concerns of: 1) making sure government funds do not pay for abortions and 2) that conscience rights are protected.

It gets better.

The bishops say in this new letter that they will continue to work with Congress but -

If final legislation does not meet our principles, we will have no choice but to oppose the bill.”

USSCB LogoThe USSCB has always advocated for some type of healthcare reform since Catholic moral teachings say that physical health is a gift entrusted to us by God. Here’s what the Catechism says:

2288: We must take reasonable care of [life and physical health], taking into account the needs of others and the common good.  Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance. [emphasis mine]

But the killing of the unborn come above anything else, as it should. Abortion is a grave moral evil and making healthcare out to be a moral right, which many have done, should never include the government funding of such an act.

The Bishops aren’t fooled by the clever rhetoric of the Obama Administration and the phony compromises put forth by pro-abortion Members of Congress.

See the full letter from the bishops here: www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/2009-10-08-healthcare-letter-congress.pdf.

 

Share