Foloww Up to Criteria for Endorsing a Candidate - A House Divided

At the risk of getting myself in more trouble than I did with my previous post on this subject, I am going to stick my neck out a bit more with today's observations. These matters are obviously highly charged with emotions, and at the risk of igniting those emotions a bit more, I will take a Michael Voris approach in today's remarks. 

As I seem to have stepped on a few toes by defending Lake County Life PAC's decisions in some of their endorsements of candidates, who did not hold a "100%" pro-life viewpoint, I may step on a few more with what I say next. Though my intent is not to step on anyone, but merely to point out that this is a much more complicated issue here ... and challenge people to think a bit more on just exactly WHY pro-lifers are so divided.  

It appears to those pro-lifers, who will describe themselves as being 100%,   that those they see as being less than 100%, are the crux of the problem.   Those others, though they also see themselves as being 100% pro-life, nevertheless, see the pro-life mission as a "spiritual battle, fought in a political arena which necessitates full understanding of the rules of engagement in that political arena."    

This division amongst pro-lifers has been going on for many years now, while babies continue to die. Why?  Since the infamous decision of Roe v Wade in 1973, groups of Lay people decided to get together to fight against this decision.  Why was it that Lay people felt they needed to do this? Where was the Church?  

As a young Catholic couple, my husband and I, who regularly attended daily mass, never heard a peep from the pulpit. We even heard that priests were telling women to "follow their own conscience" concerning birth control pills. My husband and myself believed for many years, that we were going to be the only Catholics left on the planet. Coming from the Hippie generation, you can imagine, we were certainly not very popular amongst our peers. But, more distressing, was the attitude of many priests, who also made us feel as though we were dinosaurs from the past.

One day, in particular, we asked one of the priests from our parish, Santa Maria in Mundelein, "why do we never hear anything from you priests about the evil of abortion that is scouring our land?"  His reply?  "Well", he blithely responded, "Perhaps it's just not a burning issue with other people, as it is with you."  Burning issue?   "Well, it will be a burning issue when they're in hell!", I angrily retorted!  The priest had nothing more to say, and I walked away so disheartened and confused.  This attitude on the part of the clergy only continued during our 5 children's growing and formative years, to the point where we ended up homeschooling our youngest child.

Where was that Voice of Authority, I had grown up with, which morally guided and led Catholics in every area of their lives? It seemed that the Flower Power & Free Love Age of Aquarius had infiltrated the Catholic Church, with priests wearing butterfly vestments, and becoming Johnny Carsons as they faced the people at the liturgy of the mass, trying to be hip and relevant.  I'm getting nauseous just recalling this nonsense ... which has yet to breathe it's last gasp.


This all reached critical mass with the priest scandal, wherein the full effects of disobedient clergy, to Humanae Vitae, became fully evident, and we soon understood why priests were too busy to lead their sheep.

So, back to my main question in this blog ... "Why are pro-lifers divided"?  Is it really because some of them are more pro-life than others?  Why are they so divided on how to elect pro-life candidates?  Is it really because some of them are less pro-life than others?

In any family, institution or army, there must be "LEADERSHIP"!  In the absence of leadership, the troops will become confused and disoriented and fight amongst themselves.  Many will be lost or desert, or fall into the hands of the enemy.  In the absence of said leadership in the Church, lay people have been on their own, trying to decide moral questions amongst themselves, oft  times arguing amongst themselves over those questions.  This absence of leadership has especially led to confusion and division amongst pro-lifers. In any questionable situation, there needs to be a "voice of authority", which ultimately arbitrates and settles the argument.  If that voice of authority is lacking, nothing but division will follow.

"And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand." Mark 3:25

It's a Girl! Documentary Film - Official Trailer

Fr. Pavone permitted to attend March for Life: Interview on latest developments

Planned Parenthood At It Again

  

Planned Parenthood Takes Credit for ObamaCare

In their recently released 2009-2010 annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) claimed credit for helping to "shape and pass" the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act-Obama Care. Pointing to this monstrosity as "a pivotal achievement," PPFA describes Obama Care as "a promising new era of health care."

A new era, yes-but many pro-life activists and religious leaders would characterize it differently. It promises an end to conscience rights for Christian employers and health care providers and the beginning of an outpouring of government abortion funding. Indeed, even though President Obama's executive order was supposed to protect conscience rights and prevent government abortion funding, it has not worked out that way. (See statement released by the National Right to Life for more details:

http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCToHouseOnHealthBill.pdf.)

As one commentator noted, "Health care exemptions were granted to McDonald's and numerous businesses within Nancy Pelosi's district, but the Obama administration won't extend conscience exemptions regarding abortifacient contraceptives for religious healthcare workers." And don't forget that during the 2011 budget fight, President Obama warned that he would shut down the U.S. government before letting House Speaker John Boehner present any budget that tried to cut off federal funds to Planned Parenthood. It seems ludicrous, then, that supporters of Obama Care continue to deny that it allows for government funding for abortion.

Consider the extent of government subsidies revealed in Planned Parenthood's annual report: Planned Parenthood reported over $1 billion in total net assets, and nearly half of this had come from the government. PPFA received $487.4 million from the government in 2010, a whopping 34% increase over the previous year. As Jeannie DeAngelis stated in the American Thinker, "In 2010, that is equivalent to 308,745,538 American citizens contributing $1.58 apiece to subsidize the running of a left-wing slaughterhouse." (Though PPFA claims that abortion represents only 3% of their business, based on their average charges, abortions accounted for more than half of their income. In 2010, the ratio was 1 adoption referral for every 391 abortions.)

During a time of huge government debt, it makes little sense that the federal government would increase its funding of Planned Parenthood by over $124 million. This is particularly true in light of the following:

• A 2011 Gallup poll showing that a majority of Americans believe abortion is morally wrong.  
• PPFA's support from private sources eroding during the same one-year period, decreasing by 37.7%.
• Approximately 30 executives of PPFA earning salaries lucrative enough to place them in the top 1%. 

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser stated that "Despite an unprecedented effort by statewide and federal leaders to defund them, a wave of former employees willing to testify against them, and uniform agreement amongst Republican presidential candidates that they should be defunded, Planned Parenthood continues full-steam ahead. They are unwilling to answer to the pro-life American majority that wants out of this business."

Gardasil Victims

March For Life

 

Radical Catholic in Name Only Tilted the Catholic Vote for Obama with Soros and Progressive Insurane Company Money

Michael Voris and his research crew have done a stellar job exposing so called "Catholic" social justice
useful idiots to get the Catholic vote for Obama. All the awhile with no help from the hierarchy to help expose
these pernicious rats. God help the hierarchy: in Jesus words, "Will there be no one of faith when I return?"
This Voris video is long, but the players need to be known. This Republic is at stake by the willfull desire of Obama and his henchmen to destroy this Nation under God., using the Catholic Church as their weapon.

Schrizophenic Women Forced to Be Aborted and Sterilized!

Ok, this one is personal! A 32 yr. old woman, whom we will name Jane Doe, and who was diagnosed with schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder and found to be pregnant, was ordered by a Massachusetts Judge to have an abortion, and afterwards be sterilized. Judge Christina Harms, a Harvard Law School graduate and a former lawyer in the State's welfare services, issued the order for an abortion and subsequent sterilization, to put an end to "these distressing pregnancies", reasoning that, "the woman was not competent to make a decision about an abortion, because of her "substantial delusional beliefs" (which by the way are Catholic)" Jane Doe, insisting that she was a devout Catholic, did not want the abortion, and subsequently gave birth to a son, whom her parents are caring for.

I have a very personal interest in this one, as the child of a schizophrenic mother myself.  The eldest daughter of 5 children, I and my 4 siblings, without a doubt, suffered in more ways than one,  as a result of our mother's illness.  Yet, though I have my scars, today I am a happy wife, mother and grandmother who really relishes LIFE and all that goes along with it. I would never believe, that in spite of all the obstacles that were placed in my way, due to my mother's illness, that I should have never been born!  And I know that my siblings, in spite of all their own struggles, would have to agree with me.   


I firmly believe, based on my own personal experience, that there is no child born, no matter how desperate their circumstances, that God does not bless with the gifts and grace to overcome those circumstances. Today's thinking, which comes down to us from Margaret Sanger, is that only college educated, financially secure and biologically perfect human specimens, should be allowed to reproduce themselves.  Well let me tell you something about that .... I have witnessed just as many persons, born from (so called) stable homes with college educated, financially secure, biologically perfect parents who grow up to be wastrels, selfish narcissists and suffer just as much psychological and substance abuse problems, as I have from those persons born from lacking homes and parents.


SO ...Should my schizophrenic mother have been sterilized, so that I and my siblings should have never been born?  Well, let me tell you something about my mother.  She had an illness ... yes ...  BUT ... that was not all she was!  She was not just a schizophrenic ...  she was an intelligent and very gifted woman who possessed notable artistic and writing talents ... which she passed on to me ... on down to my own granddaughter.   There were so many other aspects to her person besides an illness!  She was a viable human being, who struggled against an insidious illness, to have all the fulfillments of life that every human being yearns for ... such as a family of her own.  Should she have been denied these rights, and neutered like a dog, just because she had an illness? Was that the only answer to hers and her children's suffering?

Regarding Jane Doe, the state appeals court said, "The case of whether to bear or beget a child, is a right so fundamental that it must be extended to all persons, including those who may be incompetent."  


My own granddaughter Gracie, was actually born on my mother's birthday ... inheriting all the creative and artistic abilities of her great-grandmother before her.  Had my mother been sterilized because of her illness, all those beautiful gifts would have been lost, and little Gracie, born with the same strawberry blonde hair and creativity of her great grandmother before her, would never be.  


Are only those people born to so called "normal" parents, viable?  Is my mother's life, or my life less valuable because of our suffering?  As time has gone by and I have looked at others who came from more comfortable and nurturing childhoods ...  do I regret my birth?   Well ... even though there may be times that I feel a certain sadness over not coming from a more happy childhood, I still treasure my own life ... who I am ... and what I've become ... in spite of ...  and I thank God everyday for the great gift of my own life ...  my mother's life before me .... and my little granddaughter's life, who takes after her. 

Proud to Be Pro Life

 

Conscience Clause? "NOT"

The hierarchy has only themselves to blame. They ignored abortion long after it was imprinted on 2 generations of children. They raised our children to be illiterate of their Faith, and condoned homosexuality in their ranks, and they condoned universal health care.  Almost all so called Catholic democrats are neo-pagans who should have been excommunicated long ago. Now that the Obama Administration has made their decision, I wonder which Catholic institutions will soon invite Obama to hear him speak his lies, after all so many in the hierarchy
and college campuses have served as "useful idiots" to the socialist Utopians that are running/ruining our country.

Criteria for Endorsement of a Pro-Life Candidate

There is an old saying I remember from my childhood: "Politics makes strange bed-fellows".  I heard my parents make this statement many times, and of course as a child I never really fully understood it.  Until I grew up, at which time I came to understand that not everything in this world is clearly black and white, and that some times it's all about winning ground - verses falling on your sword over a point of argument. 

Working in the pro-life movement, as well as learning about all the political strategies that go along with that, I am reminded of a story in the Bible about the crafty steward. It comes from Luke 16, where, being accused of the mishandling of his stewardship, a man is called by his master to give an account of himself.  After summing up his situation, the crafty steward decides, that if he is relieved of his stewardship and thrown out into the street,  he is going to have to take measures to ensure security for himself - since - as he says to himself - he cannot dig ditches. And so, the story goes, that the shrewd steward calls together some of his master's debtors, and one by one has them write down a lesser amount of what they owe.  In this way, the clever steward figures he will have made a few friends, who, will welcome him into their homes, after he is cast out in the street. 

The clincher to this story comes, when the master finds out what this wretched steward has done, instead of putting his head on a chopping block, he praises the rascal, as we read in Luke 16:8 "The master praised the dishonest steward for his astuteness. For the children of this world are more astute in dealing with their own kind than are the children of light."  

As a child, this story always shocked me ... especially as it was a story told by Jesus to His disciples, where it seemed Jesus was praising disreputable and deceitful behavior. To this very day, one has to really read this story carefully and prayerfully to really understand what Jesus is telling us.  And more recently, I was reminded of this biblical tale, as I witnessed certain disagreements among pro-lifers regarding Lake County Life PAC's endorsement of certain candidates over others.  

The controversy arose over the PAC's endorsement of certain candidate's who were pro-life, but with a rape/incest exception, over another candidate who was pro-life no matter what the situation ... or as they would say: "a 100% pro-life candidate".  I watched and listened very carefully at Lake County Right to Life's Candidate Forum, as each candidate got up and spoke their views on the life issues.  I was struck by several of the candidates, for varying reasons ... and some of those candidate's who struck me were not all necessarily 100%.

The ultimate choice to endorse one candidate over another was based on 3 criteria: 1.) their position on the Life issues.  2.) their track record on the life issues, voting etc.  and 3.) their viability as a candidate who could secure a victory against the 100% pro-abort opponent.   This 3rd criteria is what prompted the source of conflict over the ultimate choice which was made by the PAC.  For some pro-lifers felt that it was more important to endorse the candidate who expressed a more 100% pro-life position, rather than another candidate who was pro-life, but with an exception, such as rape/incest. 

Now, as it turned out, the candidate whom Lake County Life PAC endorsed, though they held the one exception to their pro-life position, nevertheless met the 3rd criteria of viability as a candidate.  But, this did not set very well with the conscience of some pro-lifers, who felt it was a sell out against the principles of the pro-life cause.   

Politics is not religion ... nor is it about being a faithful steward as in a religion ... but more about being an astute steward ... who knows how to win the ultimate battle against his opponent.  If we choose the candidate with the halo on his head, who is 100% ... but who shows no chance of knocking out the opponent with the horns on his head, who is 100% against all that we stand for ... what have we gained? 

Again, Jesus tells His apostles in Matthew 10:16 "Remember I am sending you out as sheep among wolves; so be cunning as serpents and yet harmless as doves."  This paradox of trying to balance between being harmless as doves, yet cunning as serpents, is what as sheep among wolves, we must master in our dealings with the children of this world, who are "far more astute than the children of light", in Christ's own words.  

Our pro-choice opponents, being far more cunning, shrewd and astute than we on the pro-life side, have basically been kicking our proverbial but for the past 38 years!  Why?   Is Jesus asking us to be dishonest?  Is He asking us to lower ourselves to the level of the children of this world?  Of course not.  But, as the children of this world are so dang astute and cunning, Jesus is telling us to use our wits for cryin out loud!  We can't be so naive or presumptuous in thinking that just because we are on the side of right, we cannot help but win.  Every army needs a strategy to out-think and out maneuver his opponent.

One should not feel that endorsing a candidate with a rape/incest exception is a compromise of one's values, or a betrayal of the pro-life cause.  Babies are dying, while we scrupulize over the perfection of a candidate, who, though he may not be able to make the touch down, can certainly gain us more yard lines, getting us closer to our ultimate goal.     In a chess game, if the knight can't make the move, move the pawn.  And that's what it's all about.

Planned Parenthood Is At It Again

Planned Parenthood Takes Credit for ObamaCare

In their recently released 2009-2010 annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) claimed credit for helping to "shape and pass" the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act-ObamaCare. Pointing to this monstrosity as "a pivotal achievement," PPFA describes ObamaCare as "a promising new era of health care." A new era, yes-but many pro-life activists and religious leaders would characterize it differently. It promises an end to conscience rights for Christian employers and health care providers and the beginning of an outpouring of government abortion funding. Indeed, even though President Obama's executive order was supposed to protect conscience rights and prevent government abortion funding, it has not worked out that way. (See statement released by the National Right to Life for more details: http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCToHouseOnHealthBill.pdf.) As one commentator noted, "Health care exemptions were granted to McDonald's and numerous businesses within Nancy Pelosi's district, but the Obama administration won't extend conscience exemptions regarding abortifacient contraceptives for religious healthcare workers." And don't forget that during the 2011 budget fight, President Obama warned that he would shut down the U.S. government before letting House Speaker John Boehner present any budget that tried to cut off federal funds to Planned Parenthood. It seems ludicrous, then, that supporters of ObamaCare continue to deny that it allows for government funding for abortion. Consider the extent of government subsidies revealed in Planned Parenthood's annual report: Planned Parenthood reported over $1 billion in total net assets, and nearly half of this had come from the government. PPFA received $487.4 million from the government in 2010, a whopping 34% increase over the previous year. As Jeannie DeAngelis stated in the American Thinker, "In 2010, that is equivalent to 308,745,538 American citizens contributing $1.58 apiece to subsidize the running of a left-wing slaughterhouse." (Though PPFA claims that abortion represents only 3% of their business, based on their average charges, abortions accounted for more than half of their income. In 2010, the ratio was 1 adoption referral for every 391 abortions.) During a time of huge government debt, it makes little sense that the federal government would increase its funding of Planned Parenthood by over $124 million. This is particularly true in light of the following: A 2011 Gallup poll showing that a majority of Americans believe abortion is morally wrong.   PPFA's support from private sources eroding during the same one-year period, decreasing by 37.7%. Approximately 30 executives of PPFA earning salaries lucrative enough to place them in the top 1%.  Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser stated that "Despite an unprecedented effort by statewide and federal leaders to defund them, a wave of former employees willing to testify against them, and uniform agreement amongst Republican presidential candidates that they should be defunded, Planned Parenthood continues full-steam ahead. They are unwilling to answer to the pro-life American majority that wants out of this business."

Why Attend A Candidate Forum

Why Attend a Candidate Forum?
 

We are frequently reminded that every election is important. Having the right to vote brings with it the responsibility to use our voice. But in order to be sure you are voting well, you need to know where the candidates stand on the issues.

Every election really is important

Why? Because every election impacts the cause of life.

• At every level of government, and in almost every office, there will be some policies and decisions affecting pro-life issues. It may be Supreme Court appointments by the President, or a parental notification law at the state level, or zoning for an abortion clinic on a local level.
•  At the federal, state and local levels, there are people advocating for laws and policies diametrically opposed to the pro-life worldview, and they want you to pay for it.

The 2012 election is the most crucial to the cause of life in decades

Why? Because since the last election, a line has been crossed.

• For years, the Hyde Amendment prevented the federal government from paying for abortions. Despite President Obama's assurances and his executive order, under ObamaCare, abortion will be paid for by our tax dollars. The federal government has decided that new health plans must cover abortion-causing drugs, violating previously promised conscience protections. If ObamaCare is allowed to be fully implemented, it will be far more difficult to repeal.
• Decisions from the department of Health and Human Services have become radically pro-abortion, even in areas not connected to health care. For instance, faith-based organizations that have for years provided the majority of the programs fighting human trafficking (modern-day slavery) will now be excluded from working with HHS. It is clear that rescuing human trafficking victims is less important than ideology to the Obama administration.
• At the state level, the Illinois political machine perennially battles against the cause of life. Last year, through political trickery, the ultrasound bill never made it to committee. With your pro-life vote, we intend to see it passed this year.
• Locally, there are efforts underway to open a school-based clinic, which would give Planned Parenthood a foothold in our community.

The candidate forum will benefit you

Why? Because to be a competent voter, you need to be an informed voter.

•  

This Says It All

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT

My Guiding Principle: The Dignity of Life By Rick Santorum January 2, 2012 4:00 A.M. I have been asked many times, from town-hall meetings in Iowa to diners in South Carolina, to articulate what I believe in — not just about a given issue, or even something as fundamental as the role of government, but about life and reality. Folks want to know what frames my understanding of how things are and how they ought to be, my “worldview,” in order to have insight into what will guide my decision making if the American electorate chooses me to represent them in the White House. There are two texts in particular that have framed my worldview, my fundamental belief system, as it relates to my role as a public official. One is political and the other Biblical, and both foster an orienting belief that, more than any other, directs my decision making: the dignity of every human being. #ad#First, I hold these truths to be self evident: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” I can’t begin to count how many times over my public life I have quoted this foundational statement from the Declaration of Independence. It is the worldview that was held by and oriented our founders. It is a worldview that has been challenged for over two centuries, and even now is under attack. But it is this radical notion of God-granted rights and equality that set our course apart from other nations whose revolutions asserted that rights were derived from the will of either the majority or a small, enlightened elite. Our founders understood that human nature is deeply flawed and that over time, and without safeguards, government and other powers will exploit rather than protect life. The second text is from Genesis 1:27: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” We do not just have rights granted to us by our Creator; even more radically, the rights we have reflect that we have been created in God’s image. Each person has been made by God’s own hand with a purpose, each with an eternal destiny, and each with equal value, dignity, and worth. Human life must be protected at all costs, as there is nothing else of equal or greater value in our created universe. Some may discount my appeal to a Scripture passage, but not our Founding Fathers. George Washington in particular affirmed the necessity of religion to the sustenance of democracy, in a 1796 speech: Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness — these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. These beliefs are essential to the foundation and future of our nation. As Dostoevsky wrote in The Brothers Karamazov: “If you were to destroy in mankind the belief in immortality, not only love but every living force maintaining the life of the world would at once be dried up. Moreover, nothing then would be immoral, everything would be lawful.” I have become a radical believer in every person’s human dignity. It is the driver of my worldview, and therefore in conclusion I believe: #*#Every person, whether the baby in utero, my little girl Bella with her challenges, or the AIDS orphan in the inner city, has inherent dignity, and we must do all we can to preserve and respect that dignity. #*#Government has to be strong enough to protect human life, but limited enough to never exploit it. #*#As our founders recognized religion as an “indispensable support” to the health of society and necessary for the understanding of human life, government should never inhibit or discourage its role in the public square. My greatest concern is that we are at a crossroads of deep consequence regarding the role of government in the lives of the American people. Without correcting course, the road we are on will lead to the further devaluation of the inherent dignity of our citizens and their ability to live in freedom and safety. I am committed to doing everything possible to respect and protect that dignity, and opposing and reversing any policies and programs that undermine it. — Rick Santorum is a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and a Republican presidential candidate. Permalink