Friday, August 25, 2006

a bit of brilliance from Planned Parenthood

Concerning the FDA's age-restrictions on the purchase of Plan B:
“While we are glad to know the FDA finally ended its foot-dragging on this issue, Planned Parenthood is troubled by the scientifically baseless restriction imposed on teenagers,” Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said. “The U.S. has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the Western world. Anything that makes it harder for teenagers to avoid unintended pregnancy is bad medicine and bad public policy.” (Source)
That the U.S. has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates is obviously because of the inability of minors to access Plan B. It's not at all because of the influence of Planned Parenthood and so many like them. By all means, let's start giving out Plan B to school children along with pornography, condoms, and the birth control pill. Oh, and remember, don't tell their parents!

Friday, August 18, 2006

No, Virginia, There Are No Unwanted Children


It doesn’t take a doctor of semantics to decipher the fact that Planned Parenthood’s tag-line, “Every child a wanted child,” carry’s absolutely no substance at all. The phrase is used to justify abortion, which is by definition, the killing of an unborn baby. Planned Parenthood touts the phrase around and around the country, and we, the really educated citizens of the states have not united in coming up with cogent rhetoric as to why there is no such thing as “unwanted children.”

Before we deconstruct the idea of “unwantedness,” let’s recognize the appeal of the tag-line. It is appealing to consider that every child will be absolutely cherished by his or her birth parents upon birth. The appeal comes from the imbedded notion that “wanted babies” will live a life of giggling while the so-called “unwanted babies” will live a life of crying.

Giggling vs Crying.

“I want you, therefore thou shall giggle.”

“I just wanted sex and now I have a new, little, pooping human, therefore thou shall cry.”

Planned Parenthood likes the giggles, right? There’s where it gets the tag line, right? If only that were remotely true, I could be writing blogs about fashion or celebrity divorces, or something else Really Important. Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood isn’t thinking giggling vs crying. Planned Parenthood is a business and it wants your money. The way it gets your money is by scraping the lining of your uterus with a curette and emptying the “contents of the uterus” (read: YOUR BABY) out into a collection bottle. (I am not trying to be crass. I am seriously just telling the truth.)

Let’s go deep. The entire idea of “unwanted children” is a FICTIONAL IDEA. As in, it’s fake. There’s actually no such thing as unwanted children. A human being in and of his or herself cannot be ‘unwanted.’ The basic reason for this is the fact that every human being has human dignity! (Dignity means “worth.”) You’ve got it. I’ve got it. The babies of Papa New Guinea have got it. It is The Reason why we can’t abort babies.

Human dignity is understood to be inherent; something that is “inherent” is integral to our very being. The U.S. government does not grant this unto us, the National Education Association doesn’t vote on our dignity, and Kofi Annan has no part in the delineation of dignity. Human beings should have the right to live solely on the basis of being human. Furthermore, since unborn humans are human, they should have the same inherent right to live as humans that are born.

The unwanted state of being pregnant and the human inside of a pregnant woman is often confused. We transfer the idea that when being pregnant is not the desired outcome of sex, that a child is unwanted as well. This false correlation of ours does not strip the baby of his or her inherent human dignity. Just because we don’t “get” that sex makes babies, does not give us license to kill babies.
Remember that in-utero and out-of-utero, we are talking about the same child. Just as we cannot kill a child that is, for example, orphaned, out-of-utero, we cannot kill a child who is theoretically orphaned while he or she is still in-utero. Killing is still killing even if the location has changed.

The following may illustrate more clearly why ‘wanted-ness’ is not a measure by which we can justify the legality of abortion. You are walking down the street and come upon an infant lying on the sidewalk with a sign above him or her that states, “Unwanted, do not disturb.” How many people would keep walking past the baby because the sign says “unwanted?” I truly think that whether you are a business man speed walking to a meeting, a fourth grader on the way to the park, or a grad student on the way to defend your doctoral thesis, you will stop in your tracks, pick up the baby, call the police, and hold the baby until the police arrive.

Consider another angle. “Wanting” someone is a changeable feeling from one human to another human. The key here, is that human feelings change. Monday: I “want” you. Tuesday: I don’t “want” you. We cannot have legal abortion based upon a sentiment that changes.

It is often argued that it is “not fair” to bring a child into the world under particular circumstances. So is dismemberment the answer? Being killed is “more fair?” Besides, the unborn are already in the world. They are “brought in” by sex, not by birth. Birth is an event that happens in life, it does not give life.
Randy Alcorn, in the book, “Pro-Life Answers To Pro-Choice Arguments,”
comments on why it is invalid to assert that abortion is in the best interest of the child.

“One of the most misleading aspects of prochoice argumentation is that it makes it appear that abortion is in the best interests of the baby. This is so absurd that it would be laughable if it were not so tragic. A little person is torn limb from limb, never to see the light of day, for her benefit? Slave owners argued that slavery was in the best interest of the blacks, since they couldn’t make it on their own. Today people say, “I can’t have this child because I can’t give it a good life.” And what is the solution to not being able to give him a good life? To take from him the only life he has. Exploiting people and stripping them of their rights is always easier when we tell ourselves we’re doing it for their good rather than our own.” (page 142)

It is our adult assumption that babies born into particular circumstances are destined to be unhappy. It is then our assumption that we should kill people who are destined to unhappiness. We forget that the babies are already in the world and are alive. We forget that it is our adult problem of not loving enough, our adult problem of not wanting, and our adult problem of not seeing that unhappiness is not a true destiny, it is a projected assumption. How dare we assume another person’s life is doomed based upon circumstances of his or her parents.

We are being lied to by Planned Parenthood. The lie is, “You don’t have the capacity to love children that did not spring from your very own loins.” However, as the example of coming across a baby with an “unwanted” sign illustrates, we do truly have the capacity to put aside our very important lives and care for the smallest, most defenseless among us. We must recognize the lies of Planned Parenthood, we must ignore the signs above unborn babies heads that figuratively read, “Unwanted,” and we must publicly and confidently acknowledge that the standard of being “wanted” is an invalid measure when it comes to the legality of killing a little baby.

Friday, May 19, 2006

In India, Catholic nurses are under pressure to assist in abortions

"When 1,400 young Catholic nurses gathered for the first time at a nationalCatholic convention in India, they found strength in numbers to standagainst abortion and any other practices against Catholic ethics.

'Called to be His Healing Hands' was the theme of the three-day conventionthat ended May 14 in Bangalore, capital of Karnataka state, 2,060kilometers south of New Delhi.

Jesus Youth, a movement that promotes a Catholic lifestyle among youths inthe face of modern-day challenges, brought together the youngprofessionals, who mostly work in secular institutions.

In hospitals, nurses are forced to assist in abortions, according to Siji K. Mathew, Karnataka coordinator of the movement among nurses, who said theconvention focused on the 'strong pro-life stand' Catholic nurses should take in such situations.

'Some of us had to resign our jobs when we were pressured by the managementto assist in abortion procedures,' Mathew told UCA News, emphasizing theneed for 'spiritual strength' to withstand such pressure."

Read more (search down the page)

Monday, May 15, 2006

Debunking the DaVinci Code

Here are some things to keep in mind when reading the DaVinci Code. There are more, but this is all that I got in an e-mail:

The divinity of Christ The Da Vinci Code says...
Jesus is a great man or prophet in the earliest historical sources but was later proclaimed divine at the Council of Nicaea.
The Da Vinci Code overlooks...
Jesus is called "God" (theos) 7 times in the New Testament. He is called "Lord" (kyrios) in the divine sense numerous times. No serious historian argues that these texts postdate the Council of Nicaea.

The Council in fact was held to confront the heresy of Arius that affirmed that Jesus was not God

Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls The Da Vinci Code says...
The Dead Sea Scrolls along with the Nag Hammadi documents are the earliest Christian records.
History Says...
The Dead Sea Scrolls are purely Jewish documents; there is nothing Christian about them. There is also no evidence that any of the Nag Hammadi documents existed before the late second century A.D., with the possible exception of the Gospel of Thomas.

Jesus and Mary Magdalene The Da Vinci Code says...
"One particularly troubling theme kept recurring in the [Gnostic] gospels. Mary Magdalene. . . More specifically, her marriage to Jesus Christ" (p. 244).
History Says...
The Gnostic Gospels, a collection of anonymous writings that blended pseudo-Christian ideas with esoteric spirituality, say nothing about Mary and Jesus being married.
Furthermore, the four gospels and early Christian literature say nothing of Jesus being married. The best conclusion is that he simply was not.

How the Bible was collated The Da Vinci Code says...
"The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine" (p. 231).
History Says...
The Bible was not collated by Constantine, who died in 337 A.D. The Old Testament existed prior to even Jesus' day. And the New Testament, although it started coming together by the end of the first century (about 90-100 A.D.), was not formalized until about 393-397 A.D. (after Constantine's death).

The alleged "new" Bible commissioned by Constantine The Da Vinci Code says...
Constantine "commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up and burned" (p. 234).
History Says...
First, there was no "new" Bible commissioned by Constantine. The emperor simply requested that Eusebius (the Bishop of Carthage) make fifty copies of the already existing and widely accepted scriptures. Second, no evidence suggests that Constantine or anyone else "embellished" Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Third, there were no gospels burned by Constantine. Although some texts written by Arius were burned, none of them were gospels. Fourth, there were no gospels "earlier" than Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. Finally, as previously noted, the gospels in our Bible clearly depict Christ's "human traits," which is consistent with the Christian teaching that Jesus was 100% deity as well as 100% human.

Sources about Jesus used in the Da Vinci Code The Da Vinci Code says...
"The royal bloodline of Jesus Christ has been chronicled in exhaustive detail by scores of historians" (p. 253).
The Facts Say...
Following this comment about "historians," Dan Brown lists four books written by various authors: Margaret Starbird, Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln, Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince. But none of them are historians. Starbird has an M.A. in comparative literature and German. Baigent holds an undergraduate degree in psychology and is pursuing an M.A. in mysticism. Leigh is a novelist and short story writer. Lincoln gained notoriety as a BBC television personality and scriptwriter. And Picknett, along with Prince, is involved in occultism, the paranormal, and UFO studies.

The Jewish name for God The Da Vinci Code says...
"The Jewish Tetragrammaton YHWH-the sacred name for God-is, in fact, derived from Jehovah, an androgynous physical union between the masculine Jah and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah (p. 309).
History Says...
YHWH was not derived from "JEHOVAH." The term actually predates "JEHOVAH" by thousands of years. Brown, in fact, has it backwards-i.e., "JEHOVAH" was derived from YHWH. It is merely the sixteenth century Latinized form of YHWH with "a," "o" and "a" (the vowels from adonai, "my Lord") inserted between each consonant (Latinizing the word changed the "Y" and "W" to "J" and "V."). As for the word Havah, there is nothing "pre-Hebraic" about it. This is simply "Eve" in Hebrew and it appears in the Old Testament.

The Church's teaching on sex The Da Vinci Code says...
Sexual union between man and woman through which each became spiritually whole had been recast as a shameful act by the Church to 'reeducate' the pagan and feminine-worshipping religions.
The Church teaches...
The marriage bed is treasured and honored as pure (Heb. 13:4). Sexual activities and pleasure are normal, expected, and encouraged within a marriage. Sexual union is a divine moment for a husband and a wife -- a representation of the image of God that defines us. God established boundaries around sex to protect it and maximize its joy.

Celibacy in the times of Jesus The Da Vinci Code says...
Celibacy did not exist in those times.
History says.
John the Baptist was celibate and so were those belonging to the group of the Essenes. St. Paul lived and advocated it.

Anti-feminism and the Catholic Church The Da Vinci Code says...
The Catholic Church has been patriarchal and anti-feminist
The Church teaches.
It's surprising that the author does not know how much the Church honours Mary, the Mother of Jesus. The Catholic Catechism explains that man and woman are radically equal in dignity as human persons and at the same time complementary to each other insofar as they are masculine and feminine (cf. CCC 369).

The human side of Jesus The Da Vinci Code says...
"[A]ny gospels that described earthly aspects of Jesus' life had to be omitted from the Bible" (p. 244).
The Bible Says...
The gospels in the New Testament present many "earthly aspects" of Christ's life such as his physical frailties (hunger, fatigue, death); emotions (anguish, outrage, love); and relational interactions (with his mother, friends, and followers).

Feminism The Da Vinci Code says...
Leonardo's worship of the goddess and the feminine can be seen in his Mona Lisa painting. That name comes from two Egyptian deities: the god Amon and the goddess Isis, whose "ancient pictogram was once called L'ISA. The title Mona Lisa, then, is really "an anagram of the divine union of male and female (p. 121).
History Says...
Leonardo Da Vinci did not even name this particular painting. None of his works, in fact, were titled by him. The Mona Lisa was catalogued by author Giorgio Vasari in his book Lives of the Artists (1550). It was he who first called it the Monna Lisa, which in English was shortened to Mona Lisa. It simply means Madame Lisa, and refers to the likely subject: Lisa Gherardini del Giocondo, the wife of Francesco del Giocondo.

Opus Dei The Da Vinci Code says...
Opus Dei is a secret organization with members who are monks
The facts say.
Opus Dei (Latin for "work of God") is not a secret organization. It is an official Roman Catholic institution founded in 1928 by St. Josemaria Escriva, a Spanish priest. Its purpose is to help ordinary lay people seek holiness through daily work and their ordinary duties. Opus Dei members are mostly lay people. Only a small percentage is clergy. Opus Dei members have great appreciation for the religious vocation, but in fact there are neither monks nor monasteries in Opus Dei.


Adapted from Differences between book and Bible, (http://www.cbn.com/specia/DaVinciCode/)

The responses are in most part from The Truth Behind The Da Vinci Code
(http://www.parable.com/cbn/item_0736914390.htm) by Richard Abanes

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Thanks to the Bishops, again

The Bishops have spoken.

From the Culture of Life foundation:

Broad Group of Religious Leaders Unite in Support of Marriage Amendment

By Mark Adams

An unprecedented coalition of religious leaders, including 16 Catholic bishops, have joined together in calling for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. A letter released this week calling for such an amendment was signed by 50 religious leaders and included clerics from the Catholic Church, seven Protestant denominations, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Judaism and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The letter was produced by the recently formed Religious Coalition for Marriage which describes itself as an “ad hoc, interfaith committee of America’s religious leaders who share a common concern for the well-being of marriage in our nation.” The committee was formed in the hopes of encouraging religious leaders to mobilize grassroots support for the Marriage Protection Amendment which is scheduled for a vote in the Senate on June 6.

The coalition is notable for the theological diversity of its participants. In describing its mission the coalition notes that “although we do not share full unity on a host of important theological beliefs, we all agree and affirm – with a united voice – the definition, nature and purpose of marriage”. Among the 16 Catholic bishops who were signatories to the letter, seven are Cardinals. They are Cardinal Edward Egan of New York; Cardinal Francis George of Chicago; Cardinal William Keeler of Baltimore; Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles; Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington; Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley of Boston; and Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia.

During a media conference call held on Tuesday, Cardinal Rigali acknowledged that with regard to politics the Catholic Church generally prefers for its bishops to teach broad, foundational principles and leave it to the laity to develop specific public policy. But he told Culture & Cosmos that the threat against marriage is so real and immanent that he believed it necessary to advocate the proposed Constitutional amendment. “We are at rock bottom,” he said. “The Church sees this as the only practical way that marriage can be safeguarded and protected.”

In order to advance its grassroots strategy, the coalition set up a website, www.rcm.org, which provides action items, statements of various religious bodies, sample sermons, and other resources for clergy. One of the coalition’s principle goals is to start a postcard campaign in support of the amendment. The Knights of Columbus have already announced that in conjunction with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops they will be distributing 10 million such postcards. The postcards include a brief statement of support for the marriage amendment and provide a place for people to sign their name, write their address and write the address of their senator. According to a statement from the Knights of Columbus the distribution of the postcards is to be a “major project of the Knights o! f Columbus, and all councils and assemblies are asked to make it a high priority during the next two months.” USCCB president Bishop William Skylsted sent a letter to all US bishops asking them to encourage their local pastors to cooperate in the campaign when", they are contacted by local Knights.

The coalition was formed as the fruit of a series of scholars conferences organized over the past two years at Princeton University and Washington DC. Along with a small number of other groups, the Culture of life Foundation sponsored or hosted each of the three meetings.

Loyola College sinks to new low

From Defend Life:

Loyola College of Maryland has shot itself in the foot once again.

Co-habitation is being allowed in the Loyola dorms according to Dr. Vigen>Guorian, a professor of Theology and Moral Ethics at Loyola College of Maryland.

"Hooking up" has replaced traditional courtship and dating among today's college students says Guorian.

"Hooking up" wrote one of his female students who acts as a dormitory resident adviser, " is basically dating without romance" in which young adults "simply cut to the chase, the sexual part of the relationship."

At Loyola the hook-up is accomodated with what this young woman calls the "booty room."

"We have a designated booty room," she wrote, where a coed can be alone with the young man she picked up in a bar and not disturb her roommate.

Please call Father Brian Linnane, SJ, president of Loyola, and tell him that him that you are apalled that Loyola is not only tolerating but fostering this sexual abomination. His number is 410-617-2201. His fax is 410-617-5196. If you care to write a letter, send it to:

Loyola College
4501 North Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 21210

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Maryland Bishops Step Up Again!

Gov. Erlich, of Maryland, is planning on signing a bill that would allow funding for embryonic stem cell research in the state. The three MD bishops, Cardinal Keeler (Baltimore), Cardinal McCarrick (Washington), and Bishop Saltarelli (Wilmington) all signed a joint letter condeming the action:

"Enactment of this legislation means that tax dollars will be used to pay for the destruction of innocent human life," says a letter signed by the three clerics. "Human life is not to be treated as a commodity, as a raw material in science experiments. Taking innocent human life is always a great evil, regardless of whether society as a whole stands to benefit."

Thank you your Eminences and your Excellency.

Friday, March 31, 2006

Indian Doctor Sentenced for Ultrasounds

"An Indian court sentenced a doctor to two years in prison for using ultrasound tests to determine the sex of fetuses, the first physician convicted for flouting a law designed to end an epidemic of parents aborting female fetuses, officials said Wednesday.

After the 2001 census revealed the toll of female abortions, women's rights groups launched a campaign to pressure authorities to act against doctors breaking the ultrasound law.

'In 12 years of the law being in force, this is the first time the government has taken action,' said Ranjana Kumari, an activist with the New Delhi-based Center for Social Research."

Read more here.

Pontiff Spells out Role of Politicians

So B16 made it clear, really clear. Politicians need to do three things: protect life, recognize the family, and establish freedom of education.

How much clearer can you get?

Read the article here.

And in another article: B16 made it very clear, "As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person."

Read that article here.