Baltimore City Council targets pro-life pregnancy centers

Archdiocesan newspaper for Baltimore The Catholic Review:

Baltimore City Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and 10 members of the council are sponsoring a bill that Catholic leaders believe harasses pro-life pregnancy support centers.

City Council Bill 09-0406, “Limited-Service Pregnancy Centers –Disclaimers,” would require pregnancy support centers to post a disclaimer noting that they do not provide abortion or contraceptive services. Centers that do not comply would be fined $500 per day.

In an Oct. 16 letter to Rawlings-Blake, Archbishop Edwin F. O’Brien said the bill targets non-profit organizations whose mission is to help women carry pregnancies to term. He said it is “well-known” that pregnancy support centers are exclusively focused on assisting women in their choice for childbirth, and do not provide abortions or contraception.

So much for supporting women with crisis pregnancies.

Outrageous: Obama volunteer website promotes Planned Parenthood opportunities

If you're surprised, you haven't been watching who is President:

President Barack Obama promised when he was a presidential candidate in July 2007 that he would be a lapdog for the Planned Parenthood abortion business. Obama is now making good on that promise by promoting Planned Parenthood on his new volunteerism web site, Serve.gov. (LifeNews)

Ironically the search engine they use is called "All For Good". I typed in "Planned Parenthood" and "Washington DC" and found plenty of opportunities waiting for me.

Sure, this is bad. But of course I've come to expect this. President Obama believes in mainstreaming Planned Parenthood and its vision of "health care services" for women.

But let me take this new finding in a slightly different direction....

Ever notice how liberal Catholics who support the President are extremely vocal about any sort of charge made against the President which they think is unfair?

I think it is more revealing to observe their complete silence on other issues. Let's face it - the President supports the mission and organization of Planned Parenthood. That's the unavoidable conclusion to his political background, promises - and now - presidential administration.

So I probably won't be holding my breath waiting to see Catholics United, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Michael Sean Winters, and others of their ilk, hit the presses and airwaves with some sort of claim that the President isn't responsible for this sort of thing.

Well, maybe he isn't, but he sure is happy to see it happen on his watch. And he's less than silent about it.

Note: H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine - not from aborted embryos

The swine flu (H1N1) is often in the news these days. Catholics can be relieved about this news:

"A pro-life group that monitors vaccinations is pleased to report that the new H1N1 swine flu vaccines the federal government will be distributing next month do not rely on cells from babies killed in abortions. Other vaccinations have been condemned for relying on such cells to formulate the vaccines." (LifeNews)

Personally I believe an argument can be made that recourse to a vaccine that was developed using stem cell lines derived from aborted embryos is permissible according to the principle of remote material cooperation.

That said, it is always better to have access to vaccines which were not developed through such immoral methods.

Bioethics: "Pregnant mother forced to give up IVF baby after doctors gave her wrong embryo"

A small example of the problems caused by In Vitro Fertilization:

A pregnant mother will have to give birth to another couple's baby after a blunder by an IVF clinic.

Carolyn Savage had the wrong embryos implanted into her and will have to give the boy up to his biological parents as soon as he is born.

... Mrs Savage learned she was pregnant with a boy in February after deciding to try again with the last of her frozen embryos.

They learned about the mix-up after Mr Savage received a phone call at work and returned home to tell his wife.

She said: 'I was upstairs in my bedroom and he came to the door and said "I have some really bad news".

... You're pregnant,' he told her. 'But they transferred the wrong embryo.'

Mrs Savage said she just kept repeating: 'You're joking.'

But when she looked at her husband 'he was as white as a sheet'.

The couple decided not to have an abortion because of their religious beliefs, and have met the other couple and arranged a handover. (UK Daily Mail)

While I am happy to see that they have not chosen abortion, if they practiced according to Catholic "beliefs" they would never have found themselves in this tragic situation.

Dear Mr. President, go to Church.

I thought this was a fascinating read. Of course the mainstream media hasn't noticed the fact that Mr. Obama is too busy these days to attend weekly Christian services - I'm sure many of them could relate:

Dear Mr. President,

Remember all the analysis immediately after your election this past November regarding where you and your family would attend church? Newspapers and websites were filled with stories about where you would go, and numerous congregations in Washington invited you, your wife, and children to attend their Sunday morning services. Although Americans have usually displayed substantial interest in where their presidents attended church while in office, never before had there been such fascination with this issue before a president was inaugurated. At present, this focus seems ironic because you and your family have attended church in Washington only once—on Easter Sunday—since you took office (although you have attended a few services at Camp David).

... One excellent way to demonstrate your Christian commitment, which some Americans question, and provide spiritual nurture for yourself and for your family, is to attend church consistently. - Dr. Gary Scott Smith

Detroit archdiocese losing $42k a day, lays off 1/3 of staff

Long-overdue budget cuts for the Catholic Church in motor city:

The Archdiocese of Detroit announced major cuts today, slashing its central staff by 29% because of a $14.5-million operating deficit, a spokesman said.

It will reduce its central staff from 264 to 187, one of the biggest reductions in years, said Joe Kohn, an official with the archdiocese. And it plans to sell the Gabriel Richard building on Michigan Avenue in downtown Detroit, one of its main offices.

The archdiocese oversees 1.4 million Catholics in metro Detroit, the largest religious denomination in the region. But the slumping economy has taken its toll on the church's financial and property investments. And tithing is down between 5% and 10%, compared to previous years.

In a meeting today at St. Aloysius Catholic Church in downtown Detroit, Archbishop Allen Vigneron announced the changes. (Detroit Free Press)

Also on the chopping block: the Michigan Catholic, which will no longer receive a subsidy from the archdiocese.

Please pray for the Catholic Church in Detroit. I have many ties there.

Picture: Finding the wrong path to sexual fulfillment

Alternative captions for this "Womens Rights" poster:

"What if this was your only counter-argument that pre-marital sex is wrong?"

"Now that we had sex, I sure hope that it turns out he loves me."

"I want birth control to make me happy. I mean, maybe, right?"

"Science will save me, I think."

Related: "Local Catholic Bishops Fight Wisconsin Contraceptive Coverage Mandate"

Politics: The Sex-Study Stimulus Package

Paid for by my tax dollars and yours:

Examine "barriers to correct condom use" at Indiana University, at a cost of $221,000.

* Study "hookups" among adolescents at Syracuse University. Study's cost: $219,000.

* Evaluate "drug use as a sex enhancer" in an analysis of "high-risk community sex networks" at the University of Illinois, Chicago. That study will cost $123,000. (NY Post)

I don't remember signing on to any of this.

Huh? Sweden outlaws home schooling?!

As a proud product of home-schooling, I find this decision deeply disturbing:

The founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association says home schooling in Sweden will soon be banned altogether, with a few minor exceptions.

Mike Farris says that Sweden will ban all home schooling except for children with medical exemptions and foreign workers with the appropriate work visas.

"That's it. People who have religious convictions or are home schooling for religious reasons will not be given one of these very rare exemptions," he points out. "And so for all intents and purposes, home schooling is going to be banned in Sweden. They're following the German statute, following the German model."

In Germany, parents face stiff penalties if they are caught illegally home schooling their children. The Romeike family recently left Germany and is seeking asylum in the U.S. after facing stiff fines and the potential loss of custody rights for home schooling their children. The Home School Legal Defense Association is offering them legal help. (OneNewsNow)

Whatever other intentions a country may have when they outlaw home-schooling, the bottom line is that it undermines the fundamental right of parents to be the primary education of their offspring.

By the way, if you are homeschooling in the United Stares or are considering it, you need to know about the Home School Legal Defense Association. They are your friends.

Evil: "Possessed" Teen Stabs 3 Younger Siblings

Shocking:

A troubled Bronx teen allegedly in a zombie-like trance stabbed his two younger brothers and sister yesterday – and was prevented from murdering them by a Good Samaritan, authorities said.

Cops say 17-year-old Nelson Santos lost it at about 3:30 p.m. and attacked his two brothers, ages 13 and 6, and his 9-year-old sister, with a knife in their second-floor apartment in Morrisania.

Police did not give a motive for the stabbing or what type of weapon was used, but the Daily News reports Santos told cops he was "zombie-like" and used a butcher knife.

A police source told the paper the boy said he was seeing demons and neighbors said he practiced black magic. (NBC New York)

This is so sad. Demonic possession is often *confused* with psychological causes, but the fact that this individual was also dabbling in black magic makes him a perfect candidate for real demonic influence. Demonic influence is real and Catholics ought to be careful to avoid things related to black magic and have frequent recourse to the sacraments.

We rarely appreciate how many harmful evil influences are baptism saves us from - now let's double our efforts to resist Satan and all his works through frequent reception of the Eucharist and Confession.

Confessions are often offered on Saturdays. It's my personal opinion that Catholics ought to go to Confession at least once a month, and ideally, every couple weeks, even for venial sins.

Surprise: Washington behind forcing Belmont Abbey to pay for contraception

I blogged on this story earlier in the week. Turns out someone pulling strings in Washington is responsible for reversing the previous conclusion, which was in favor of Catholic religious liberty:

"In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) today, Belmont Abbey College president Dr. William Thierfelder said officials at the Charlotte division of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) told him that a decision to close a discrimination complaint against the school for failing to offer contraception coverage was reversed after the matter went to the nation's capital."

The times, they are a-changin' for the worse.

update - whoops! forgot to include the link to the original LSN article.

Belmont Abbey College in hot water for daring not to pay for contraception

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in its great wisdom, has determined that Belmont Abbey College discriminated against women when it changed a policy that had previously allowed women to have oral contraception covered by the College's medical plan.

This is discrimination against women, the EEOC says, because only women take oral contraception. Never mind the fact that Belmont Abbey also doesn't pay for male prophylactics (I presume). I guess a group of men haven't filed that suit yet.

It's interesting that Belmont Abbey College, in the policy change I mention above, also ceased paying for voluntary sterilization and abortion. I wonder if the EEOC will next say that excluding abortion as a medical "benefit" equals discrimination as well?

If Belmont Abbey College doesn't re-instate the oral contraception coverage, they could face further legal action from the EEOC. So they could use some prayers, and some free legal advice.

Just another day in the life of an institution trying to be Catholic in the United States....

update - the Cardinal Newman Society has this on their radar:

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has ruled that a small Catholic college must include coverage for artificial contraceptives in its employee health insurance plan, raising new concerns about the need for conscience protections and religious exemptions in America’s health care policies.

The Cardinal Newman Society (CNS) today sent a letter to EEOC acting chairman Stuart Ishimaru, noting that “it is ironic that the federal agency responsible for protecting against discrimination has so blatantly engaged in an inexcusable violation of religious liberty in its Belmont Abbey ruling.”

CNS also is sending a letter to all Catholic bishops in the United States, informing them of the EEOC action against Belmont Abbey College and highlighting the dangerous precedent this ruling sets to force Catholic employers to include contraceptive coverage in employee health plans.

update 2: Patrick Reilly, President of the Cardinal Newman Society, has an op-ed on this ruling against Belmont Abbey College in the Wall Street Journal.

Picture: Sotomayor photoshopped into Guadalupe Image

... 'cuz it's cool to make fun of Catholic stuff. (/sarcasm)

NewsBusters reports:

With the start of Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court nomination confirmation hearings the topic of abortion naturally arises – not only because it one of our most polarizing legal and social issues, but also because Sotamayor claims to be Catholic, a religion that adamantly and explicitly teaches the evil of abortion.

And while her Catholicism scares some liberals, others are using it as a selling point, and in doing so desecrating a holy image of the Virgin Mary. Felix Sanchez, the CEO of D.C. government and public relations firm TerraCom and chairman of the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts, has updated his Twitter page with a background of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Over Our Lady’s face, the likeness of Sotomayor has been superimposed (shown at right).

The patron saint of all the Americas, Our Lady of Guadalupe has a special place in the hearts of Hispanic Catholics, especially Mexicans (which Sotomayor is not). But Sanchez seemed to use the image to appeal to all Hispanics and to promote his plea to “Confirm Sonia Maria Sotomayor,” as his Twitter page says.

Yesterday, NARAL officially backed Sotomayor.

While elected officials who claim to be pro-life hem and haw about how difficult it is to pin down what Sotomayor actually thinks about abortion, one of the most pro-abortion groups in the United States is perfectly happy to take a wild guess.

Oh yeah, and shame on Felix Sanchez.

GE says "Who needs Lab rats? We have human stem cells!"

I wish I was joking:

General Electric has announced that it will use embryonic stem cells provided by Geron Corporation for the purpose of testing toxic effects of drug treatments.

GE issued a statement, attempting to preempt criticism over the decision, saying, "We acknowledge the considerable debate and take very seriously the ethical and societal issues associated with research using stem cells derived from embryonic or fetal tissue."

"We conduct our research in an ethically and scientifically responsible manner," the statement said. (LifeSiteNews)

How do they get to claim they are conducing "ethical" research? 

What if I were to steal a video someone made, upload it to my American Papist You Tube Channel and when the original copyright-holder complained, responded by saying "Don't worry, I did it ethically"?! Who would be satisfied by such a dismissive response?

This habit of using human instead of animal stem cells marks the continuation of a dangerous trend:

Konstantin Fielder, General Manager of Cell Technologies at GE Healthcare said that stem cells harvested from human embryos could even replace lab rats as the primary scientific testing method.

"Once you have human cells and you can get them in a standardized way, like you get right now your lab rats in a standardized way, you can actually do those experiments on those cells," he said.

Do something about this: Contact General Electric on the web or call them at (203) 373-2211.

Open topic: New Science Czar Once Backed Forced Abortions?

This is just. plain. scary:

Another nominee of President Barack Obama is coming under fire for taking an extreme position in favor of abortion. This time, John Holdren, whom Obama appointed to become Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, is accused of backing forced abortions and population control.

Holdren will become Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Informally, the position is known as the Science Czar.

In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, Obama's nominee wrote that women could be forced to have abortions whether they wanted them or not. (LifeNews)

And if you really want your toes to curl, visit this link which provides all the details.

update - in fairness: "Obama’s science czar does not support coercive population control, spokesman says"

Report: "More Murder by Swiss Euthanasia Group"

Busy week for me, so commentary will be brief ... sorry to start a Wednesday with such a depressing story:

LONDON – British conductor Edward Downes, a longtime stalwart at the Royal Opera and maestro of the first-ever performance at Sydney's iconic Opera House, has died with his wife Joan at an assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland. He was 85 and she was 74.

The couple's children said Tuesday that the couple died "peacefully and under circumstances of their own choosing" on Friday at a Zurich clinic run by the group Dignitas. (AP)

For a Catholic take on this, see the Courtier's analysis.

Huh? Justice Ginsburg thought Roe was to allow government eugenics

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made some shocking comments to the New York Times magazine on Tuesday:

Q: If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.

Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong. [bolding mine]

What did she just say? That Roe would legalize abortion, and then through Medicaid funding, those abortions would be readily available to "populations that we don't want to have too many of." In other words, primarily low-income persons, and particularly, inner-city african americans, who represent the majority of those who undergo the procedure.

That's despicable, Justice Ginsburg. 

Ed Morrissey has commentary.

Report: Obama meets with Catholic reporters

As I reported earlier today, this morning Obama met with representatives of Catholic newspapers, and CNS has a report.

The list of organizations in attendance was a who's-who list of liberal Catholic print publications, with just enough Conservative publishers to appear balanced (actually, just one - the National Catholic Register, because Vatican Radio isn't American and CNS is USCCB-sponsored, and therefore an obvious choice). 

Anyway, not only were liberal publications National Catholic Reporter and America magazine invited (which I predicted), but also Commonweal and Catholic Digest. A religion reporter from Washington Post was invited as well. Of course, no invitation was extended to Catholic World Report or Our Sunday Visitor - they might ask awkward questions, you see. 

As for what was said, it is so discouraging to see that Obama continues to bring up the example of Cardinal Bernardin unchallenged. Today he told the Catholic reporters that "his encounters with the cardinal continue to influence him, particularly [the cardinal's] "seamless garment" approach to a multitude of social justice issues." 

Obviously, Obama is choosing to be selectively influenced, because Cardinal Bernardin himself went on record with the National Catholic Register in 1988 and said: ""I don't see how you can subscribe to the consistent ethic and ... [feel] that abortion is a 'basic right' of the individual."

Cardinal Bernardin went on to say in that same interview:

"I know that some people on the left, if I may use that label, have used the consistent ethic to give the impression that the abortion issue is not all that important anymore, that you should be against abortion in a general way but that there are more important issues, so don't hold anybody's feet to the fire just on abortion. That's a misuse of the consistent ethic, and I deplore it."

Now, if ever there was a golden opportunity to ask Obama what he would say in response to these words of Cardinal Bernardin's, it was this morning when the current publisher of the same magazine which originally published the Cardinal's words - Fr. Owen Kearns of the National Catholic Register - was seated at a table where Obama, once again, began to claim the mantle of Cardinal Bernardin.

... but I bet you it didn't happen. And that's why people like me are not invited to Obama's meetings. Because there are some questions he can't handle, and his team knows who to invite to ensure those questions don't get asked.

Some "listening session."

update: National Catholic Register's Tim Drake with Fr. Owen Kearns take on the meeting. Each participant was allowed to ask one question. I'd like to hear what was asked, and how Obama responded.

"Badethics": Obama Plans to Replace Bush’s Bioethics Panel

Piece by piece, the group of ethical, biomedical policy advisors that Bush assembled is being dismantled by Obama's administration:

Members of the President’s Council on Bioethics were told by the White House last week that their services were no longer needed and were asked to cancel a planned meeting, a council staff member said Wednesday.

The council was disbanded because it was designed by the Bush administration to be “a philosophically leaning advisory group” that favored discussion over developing a shared consensus, said Reid Cherlin, a White House press officer.

President Obama will appoint a new bioethics commission, one with a new mandate and that “offers practical policy options,” Mr. Cherlin said. (New York Times)

Call me a realist, but I'm pessimistic about the new council Obama will appoint. It's extremely telling what Cherlin had to say about the current members of the council: the replacement of "consensus" over philosophical "discussion", to my mind, means that Obama is not open to discussion on biomedical issues when he's already decided what his policy is going to be. 

However, such a mode of operating renders a bioethics council meaningless - in other words, a council that does not conduct rigorous philosophical discussion is nothing more than a rubber-stamping beauracracy.

This shift of emphasis and vision by Obama is especially troubling considering what promises he has made previously about having a more "ethical" administration that takes into consideration the wisdom of the "experts."

So are experts merely consensus-takers, in Obama's mind?

update: Peter Augustine Lawler, one of the council members who was just given his notice, has published his "Reflections on my Termination". A sample:

I was assured that "President Obama recognizes the value of having a commission of experts in bioethical issues to provide objective and non-ideological bioethics advice to his Administration." It's hard to deny that three shots were being taken here at the Bush Council. It was non-expert, unobjective, and ideological. I couldn't help but think that I, in particular, was being called an amateur faith-based ideologue, as I was by various Democrats and techno-libertarians during the election of 2004 when I was appointed, although it's doubtful that the man who signed the letter actually knows much of anything about me in particular.

There's actually a fourth shot, I think. For Obama, a valuable Council does nothing but offer advice to the administration. The Bush Council was actually given the additional mandate of public education, of developing a national dialogue on controversial bioethical issues.

How much notice was the council given to cease-and-desist? Oh, about 24 hours.

Related: "A Dim Future - After disbanding the President’s Council on Bioethics, what kind of advisory body will Obama put together?" in Catholic World Report online.

Full disclosure: the founder of the American Principles Project, which I recently joined, was founded by Dr. Robert George of Princeton, who served as a member of the President's council.

Cameron Diaz: “We don't need any more kids. We have plenty of people.”

Oh Cameron:

Cameron Diaz has said in an interview in the July issue of Cosmopolitan Magazine, which comes out tomorrow, that “We don't need any more kids. We have plenty of people on this planet.” (LifeSiteNews)

Previous gem from Miss Diaz:

“If you think that rape should be legal, then don’t vote. But if you think that you have a right to your body, and you have a right to say what happens to you and fight off that danger of losing that, then you should vote,” she said.

Maybe her publicist could also begin sending her highlights from world census data.

Important: CT legislature attempts to oppress Catholic Church, Bp. Lori leads response

Connecticut is becoming a flash-point for government oppression of Catholic institutional autonomy. 

I reported extensively on the events which have led to this situation when they began to unfold in early March of this year.

Bishop Lori is not taking this most recent - and most serious - attack lying down:

The bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport, Conn., says he's a man of God, not a lobbyist. But state officials say he's both.

According to the Connecticut Office of State Ethics, the diocese acted as a lobbying organization in March when it rented buses to transport people to a rally in Hartford — the state capital — to protest a bill that would have granted more power to parishioners regarding church finances.

Officials also are investigating whether the church acted as a lobbying organization on its Web site when it urged parishioners to contact lawmakers about the bill, which eventually was withdrawn amid public outcry, and about a another bill to legalize same-sex marriage, which was signed into law in April.

Now the ethics office is "evaluating" whether the diocese failed to register as a lobbyist — an investigation that Bishop William Lori says violates the diocese's First Amendment right to free speech and assembly.

"I don't know what the motive of the Office of State Ethics was or is, but I do know that their actions stem directly from our attempts to defend ourselves in the face of two pieces of legislation that were unfriendly to the day-to-day mission of the church," Lori told FOXNews.com on Thursday.

"We were simply seeking to fulfill our mission, to continue to be ourselves."

And the diocese is fighting back, bringing a civil lawsuit against two Office of State Ethics officials — Enforcement Officer Thomas K. Jones and Executive Director Carol Carson." (FOX News)

Make no mistake, what is happening in Connecticut is also critically important for the Church throughout the United States. I'll be keeping a close eye on this situation as it develops. Keep it tuned here at AmP and also visit the Bridgeport diocese website.

If the Connecticut legislature succeeds in penalizing the Church for acting as a "lobbyist" organization there, the rights of Catholics and Catholic institutions will be endangered elsewhere. We must stop their efforts in their tracks.

Noted: "Catholic Answers sues IRS, alleging ‘intimidation’ on political issues"

I will be watching to see how this situation develops with interest:

The apologetics organization Catholic Answers has filed suit against the Internal Revenue Service claiming the federal tax collection agency has “intimidated” churches and non-profit groups into silence on politically controversial moral issues.

In an announcement posted at the organization’s web site, Catholic Answers president Karl Keating explained that the IRS fined the group for a 2004 e-letter it wrote saying that Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry should not be allowed to receive Holy Communion.

Keating charged that Francis Kissling, then-leader of the pro-abortion front group “Catholics for a Free Choice,” had instigated the IRS action with a complaint.

He said Kissling “hated” Catholic Answers’ “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics,” which aimed to educate Catholics on issues such as abortion. However, the guide did not mention any candidates or political parties and was cleared of any violations by the IRS. (CNA)

Catholics for a Free Choice use bullying tactics?! That's ... very believable.

NCRegister: 3 Things Obama Didn't Say in Cairo

Tom Hoopes has a brilliant re-keying of several passages in Obama's speech to a muslim audience in Cairo earlier this week:

Obama told his Muslim audience: “[W]e must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts and that too often are said only behind closed doors.”

Hmmm … here are three things he didn’t seem to want to say openly in Cairo: He didn’t praise doubt, or promote LGBT, or read the Koran’s next verse.

[Read the jarring parallelisms Hoopes sets out to prove these three points.]

David Corn in MotherJones has a perfect phrase to describe what Obama is doing:

"Ultimately, Obama is calling for universal acceptance of a relativistic, ecumenical, multicultural view of human nature and the world."

The problem at the center of Obama's position, of course, is that it is premised on a relativistic world-view. This core despair of truth irrevocably flavors his ecumenical, multicultural outreach, vitiating it of the effectiveness it could have if it were objective.

Calling all bad Catholics - Obama has a position for you

Sure enough, months after taking office, Obama is quietly, but systematically, staffing his offices with "bad" Catholics:

President Barack Obama has rewarded the head of a fake pro-life Catholic group that was responsible for misleading voters about his abortion position to a top Health and Human Services post. The nomination is seen as political payback for Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG).

Obama named former CACG executive director Alexia Kelley to head the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Kelley is also a former advisor to the John Kerry presidential campaign and Kerry is a strong abortion advocate. (LifeNews)

Maybe "bad" Catholics is too strong, how about simply "bad advice" Catholics:

CACG also released a voter guide in 2006 that was condemned by pro-life groups for misleading Catholics on abortion.

The CACG booklet argued “we often must vote for candidates who hold the ‘wrong’ Catholic positions on some issues in order to maximize the good our vote achieves in other areas.”

There's a simple label for this sort of thinking: "proportionalism."

Unfortunately, proportionalist thinking seems to be the best way to earn a spot in Obama's administration.

Euthanasia in the US: Wash. woman first to die under new law

A sad story:

Linda Fleming was diagnosed with terminal cancer and feared her last days would be filled with pain and ever-stronger doses of medication that would erode her mind.

The 66-year-old woman with late-stage pancreatic cancer wanted to be clear-headed at death, so she became the first person to kill herself under Washington state's new assisted suicide law, known as "death with dignity."

"I am a very spiritual person, and it was very important to me to be conscious, clear-minded and alert at the time of my death," Fleming said in a statement released Friday. "The powerful pain medications were making it difficult to maintain the state of mind I wanted to have at my death. And I knew I would have to increase them."

With family members, her physician and her dog at her side, Fleming took a deadly dose of prescription barbiturates and died Thursday night at her home in Sequim, Wash. (AP)

LifeNews:

"... in Oregon, pro-life advocates point to abuses of the assisted suicide law.

Oregon resident Barbara Wagner found out Oregon health officials would pay for a suicide but not medication to treat her cancer.

... [a] report also indicates that 59 physicians wrote 88 prescriptions -- indicating some doctors are writing more than one lethal prescription for patients.

That leads pro-life advocates to wonder if they are truly finding better alternatives for their patients or just encouraging them to seek death as a solution. 

Assisted suicide is a failure of medicine, not an achievement.

Why did Obama use "children" over "fetus" to describe the unborn?

Dan Gilgoff spots something interesting in Obama's ND speech:

One line in particular in President Obama's Notre Dame speech really jumped out at me: "Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term."

Obama used the word children as opposed to fetus, employing the nomenclature of antiabortion activists as opposed to that of the pro-abortion-rights movement. If the fetus is a child, antiabortion advocates say, how can you justify abortion?

... Is the president subtly invoking the antiabortion lexicon in addressing conservative religious audiences? Or am I reading too much into this? (US News)

I have to respond that, sadly, I think Gilgoff is reading too much into this.

You see, abortion advocates are happy to use the term "child" to describe a "wanted" child. In other words, for them, a child is not a "child" until the mother has made a choice to keep it. Otherwise a "child" remains a "fetus" until he or she takes their first breath of air.

What changes for that child at that moment - besides location - escapes me, but so goes the illogical logic of abortion supporters.

Besides, Obama spoke about his desire to eliminate "offending" words from the public discourse on abortion (funny that he chose a term commonly used against pro-lifers - "ideologue"). Can one imagine how jarring it would be, considering the audience, to have called an unborn child a "fetus"? Especially considering how often the word is used in the phrase "terminate a fetus"?

I would hope somewhat jarring.

Carla Bruni criticizes Pope Benedict XVI on condoms

Carla Bruni has evidently had a religious de-awakening:

"Mrs Bruni-Sarkozy said: "I was born Catholic, I was baptised, but in my life I feel profoundly secular.

"I find that the controversy coming from the Pope's message – albeit distorted by the media – is very damaging.

"In Africa it's often Church people who look after sick people. It's astonishing to see the difference between the theory and the reality.

"I think the Church should evolve on this issue. It presents the condom as a contraceptive which, incidentally, it forbids, although it is the only existing protection," she told Femme Actuelle, the women's magazine." (UK Telegraph)

Gerald Warner responds:

"Even from a secular viewpoint, if we did not have the wise words of Carla Bruni to guide us we might have lent credence to the Catholic abstinence campaign in Uganda which reduced the 18 per cent HIV infection rate among adults in 1992 to 5 per cent in 2007.

Without Bruni, we might be tempted to listen to uninformed commentators such as the director of the AIDS Prevention Center at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies who said: "The best evidence we have supports the Pope's comments."

Gotta love British irony.

USF cancels master's program in theology, and some aren't pleased

An interesting situation in San Francisco about the Catholic identity of their Jesuit university:

The University of San Francisco has canceled its master's in theology program, provoking a bitter disagreement about what it means for the future of the university.

Some faculty, alumni and students connected to the program say the university is losing the graduate degree most closely linked with its Jesuit Catholic mission. They say the closure is the culmination of a series of actions eroding the institution's Catholic identity.

But USF President Stephen Privett, a Jesuit priest for 38 years, said such broad statements misconstrue the nature of the university as it tries to engage with a rapidly changing world.

"It would be simplistic to reduce the Catholic character to any single program," Privett said in an interview. (San Francisco Chronicle)

Deacon Keith Fournier is running an open letter from a graduate student in the program, which begins:

“I am a graduate student in the master’s theology program at the University of San Francisco. Unfortunately, we have been notified by the program director that the program is scheduled to be terminated. Fr. Daniel Kendall, who has been at the University since 1979, was notified of the decision to terminate the program via email. The President and Dean of the University did not have the professional courtesy to meet Fr. Kendall in person to give him the news of the decision”.

Current students have also setup an online petition addressed to the President of USF.

From my brief scan, it appears this program does indeed provide a unique service in the area (evening/weekend classes so working folks can get a degree, etc.) and, well, a Catholic university without even an MA in theology strikes me as a bit incongruous, especially if the program was breaking even.

I post this for those interested in perhaps signing the petition and learning more about the situation, especially if you are local to the area. The argument of the petition is a good place to start I'd suggest.

update: Jack Smith at The Catholic Key has more helpful information on this subject. He attended USF.

Albacete: on Abortion/Torture, Catholic Church "only coherent position in debate"

Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete is a priest-scientist and one of the leaders of the movement Communion and Liberation in the United States.

In his column of yesterday, Msgr. Albacete makes an excellent point which I think is very topical to several ongoing AmP debates:

"The only coherent position in the debate about these two issues [of abortion and torture] is that of the Catholic Church. On the one hand, religious conservatives tend to be more open to the possibility of approving torture in special circumstances, while the secularists concede no such possibility of compromise. Only those who embrace the position of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church condemn equally both abortion and torture in all cases. Other Catholics (many serving in Congress and in the Obama Administration) follow the secularist arguments condemning torture but defending abortion rights. The President, who professes an abstract "middle ground" on abortion, unequivocally condemns torture in all circumstances.

... For the Catholic Church, faith is the origin of the moral judgment, but faith is not separate from reason. It can and should be verified by a rightly understood reason in all human beings. The Catholic Bishops are still searching for effective ways to make this argument.

I take that line as a commission: let us help the bishops discover effective ways to make this argument in the public forum, with confidence and charity. I think we typically have more trouble with the former.

{update: I knew this would be to open another can of worms. So let me clarify:

What I specifically agree with in this article is this: Those who think torture is intrinsically wrong evacuate their justification of tolerating abortion when they seek to universally outlaw torture.

In other words, how can Obama (and secularists) "unequivocally condemn torture in all circumstances" and yet posit an "abstract 'middle ground' on abortion" which tolerates its practice (and even expands access to it)?

The only way I can see reconciling the two positions is to frankly acknowledge that Obama and secularists don't really think abortion is wrong. Because if they did, they would treat it like torture and universally outlaw it.

I'm surprised to have to make this point, but it's amazing how often one will still hear something like: "Obama agrees with us that abortion is a tragedy, but he just can't see a way of preventing a woman from choosing it."

That's what I was going for. I think the torture debate is important, but let's not miss how it provides a devastating contrast when it comes to our ongoing debate about the fundamental right to life of our citizens.}

Photo: Artist depicts Obama wearing crown of thorns

'The Truth' by Painter Michael D'Antuono which will be unveiled on President Obama's 100th Day in Office at NYC's Union Square. (PRNewsFoto/NOAH G POP FAM)

Yes, it's needlessly provocative/offensive. That's not, however, what I find intersting. After all, everyone expects modern artists to do something like this. But what does it say about our country that this depiction generates such interest, on any level besides the (to me, obvious) level of it being a blasphemous comparison of Obama's sufferings to those of Christ.

I typically don't link to WorldNetDaily, but if this is of interest to readers they have a treatment posted {update - link fixed. sorry about that!}.

Outrageous: Homeland Security document claims Pro-Lifers may be terrorists

It's a bad time to hold minority convictions:

Just months into his administration, President Barack Obama is already targeting pro-life advocates as the Obama administration has released a document that claims pro-life people may engage in violence or extremism. The new document comes on the heels of one in Missouri that caused a national uproar.

According to the Washington Times, a footnote attached to the nine-page report from the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis say the activities of pro-life advocates is included in "rightwing extremism in the United States.”

"It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," the warning says. (LifeSite)

Pro-abortion advocates love to paint pro-lifers as extremists. Pot, meet kettle.

John Tomasic tries to cast Abp. Chaput in a bad light

John Tomasic, writing at the Colorado Independant, tries to do a hit job on me and Archbishop Chaput:

"Rejoicing in the anti-Obama speech campaign, “American Papist” blogger Thomas Peters referenced Chaput’s letter-writing call-out in real time at the blog. Peters later blogged his hope that Bishop D’Arcy employ the “nuclear option” and “remove Notre Dame’s Catholic identification.”"

Let's get the facts straight. First, I don't "rejoice" at anti-Obama speech. Instead, I rejoice at Catholic bishops upholding Catholic teaching, which always defends the rights of the innocent, and especially the helpless. Second, I never expressed "hope" that Bishop D'arcy would employ the "nuclear option", I said: "I don't think it will happen in this case, but down the road ... next time .... somewhere else .... it's worth reading up on the possibility." (see the difference?)

Here is one more taste of the journalistic backlash Archbishop Chaput receives on his home turf for trying to defend the unborn: "The archbishop is likely back in Denver now. Look for him to appear at a major local news outlet soon, if he hasn’t already."

And why, exactly, shouldn't an Archbishop make media appearances? Notice how Tomasic doesn't even try to grapple with what Chaput is saying. For Tomasic, the mere fact that an Archbishop is speaking out publicly about current issues strikes him as inappropriate.

Well, guess what, freedom of speech applies to the leaders of the Catholic Church, too.

Today: White House conference call on reducing abortion

We've been waiting for the White House to fulfill its promise (featured also in the Democratic National Convention platform) of reducing abortions in America.

Tomorrow is the first concerted effort to do that:

I've learned that the White House will kick off its much-discussed plan to reduce abortions tomorrow morning with a conference call to religious leaders and abortion-rights advocates that will feature key White House aides. The call reflects the White House plan to bring faith-based groups, including conservative ones, together with pro-abortion rights organizations to reduce demand for abortion. Until now, those two camps have frequently been at loggerheads. - Dan Gilgoff

It's hard for pro-life groups not to be at loggerheads with individuals like Melody Barnes "who served on the board of directors of Emily's List, a group that has spent nearly $250 million promoting pro-abortion candidates" and also served on the board of directors of Planned Parenthood (LifeNews).

Make no mistake: Catholics want to reduce abortions in America. This should be easy common ground for us. At the same time, we understand that the way towards reducing abortion is not (outrageously) to remove restrictions on abortion access (as many of Obama's supporters have advocated), and also not to increase the distribution of contraception (it's immoral, offensive to Catholic values, and does not adequately address the underling cause of problem pregnancies).

So I'm holding out hope for this conference call, without holding my breath.

update:Dan Gilgoff reports on what happened:

This morning's White House conference call kicking off its abortion-reduction initiative focused largely on asking participants to submit information about abortion-reduction programs that have already worked at the local level. Led by President Obama's chief domestic policy adviser, Melody Barnes, the White House announced that it would sponsor a series of meetings in coming months in search of common ground on abortion reduction. The meetings would include both supporters and opponents of abortion rights.

"Barnes said that the White House was not going to try to change anybody's mind on abortion and that she knew people had long-held convictions on various sides of the debate," one participant on the call, an abortion-rights foe, tells me. "But she said her assignment from the president was to seek common ground to prevent unintended pregnancies, including teen pregnancy; to reduce the need for abortions; and to support families for whom economic concerns were an issue. They also talked about promoting adoption."

No word from the White House on how many people joined the 15-minute call. Participants were in listen-only mode.

Also, he says Obama's Faith Advisory Council will meet for first time next week.

Hope?

I need to find out who was in on the call and who is on the council.

Video: "Following atheist trend, Britons seek 'de-baptism'"

Signs of the times:

Related article:

More than 100,000 Britons have recently downloaded "certificates of de-baptism" from the Internet to renounce their Christian faith.

The initiative launched by a group called the National Secular Society (NSS) follows atheist campaigns here and elsewhere, including a London bus poster which triggered protests by proclaiming "There's probably no God."

"We now produce a certificate on parchment and we have sold 1,500 units at three pounds (4.35 dollars, 3.20 euros) a pop," said NSS president Terry Sanderson, 58.

... De-baptism organisers say the initiative is a response to what they see as increasing stridency from churches -- the latest last week when Pope Benedict XVI stirred global controversy on a trip to AIDS-ravaged Africa by saying condom use could further spread of the disease.

"The Catholic Church is so politically active at the moment that I think that is where the hostility is coming from," said Sanderson. "In Catholic countries there is a very strong feeling of wanting to punish the church by leaving it."

Surely this would count as a formal act of defection, canonically speaking?

Outrageous: UK abortion clinics to advertise on TV for first time

You can't advertise cigarettes, but you can advertise mass murder:

Condom adverts could also be shown before the 9pm watershed. The Committee of Advertising Practice and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice is launching a 12 week consultation to gauge reaction to the plans.

The watchdog claims it is responding to Government calls for action to combat rising teenage pregnancy.

It would be the first time that pro and anti abortion services will be allowed to advertise.

However, those against abortion will be required to make clear if they do not refer women for abortion so that delays do not result in medical complications.

The move has been criticised by the church and pro-life groups. (UK Telegraph)

And also criticized by Ed West who says:

These abortion adverts are supposed to combat our teenage pregnancy rate, currently six times neighbouring Holland's, but will only have the reverse effect. The Government has already spent a fortune combating unwanted pregnancy these past dozen years, making abortion and contraception ever easier and looking surprised when the pregnancy rate fails to fall or even goes up. They're like General Melchett in Blackadder Goes Forth, sending thousands of men to their deaths in the hope that this time the "big push" will work.

It won't. If It didn't before, why will it work now? Alcoholics Anonymous have a saying: "If you keep doing the same thing, you'll keep getting the same result".

Forget condoms and abortion adverts: money spent on normal academic classes that instil students with self-confidence and teach them to think for themselves would bring better results. But that would mean the health establishment getting over its addiction to sex education.

Of course I think West's solution fall short. But it's far better than the one proposed by the UK government.

"Addiction to sex education." I hope people pick up that damning phrase.

"U.S. abortion, vasectomy rates rise as economy falters"

Absolutely heartbreaking:

Doctors in the U.S. are reporting an increased demand for abortions or vasectomies during the recession.

A pregnant woman in Oakland, Calif., told her doctor she walked to the medical centre in flip-flops and tears to save bus fare after her boyfriend lost his job. She was seeking an abortion to prevent what would have been her fourth child.

"This was a desired pregnancy — she'd been getting prenatal care — but they re-evaluated expenses and decided not to continue," Dr. Pratima Gupta told the Associated Press.

"When I was doing the options counselling, she interrupted me halfway through, crying, and said, 'Dr. Gupta, I just walked here for an hour. I'm sure of my decision.'"

In Illinois, Planned Parenthood said it performed a record number of abortions in January, many of them motivated by economic worries, said CEO Steve Trombley, who declined to give exact numbers. (CBCNews)

Abortion is not the answer to economic hardship. Many organizations provides help to women facing crisis pregnancies. Feel free to post links to them in the comment box.

I want to be very careful how I phrase this next question. I am not trying to make any sort of political capital out of this. I just want to raise the issue that Obama and the democrats made a huge deal during the election that they wish to provide tangible aid to women facing crisis pregnancies. I agree this is a very good thing (I disagreed that it is the only thing we can do to eliminate the scourge of abortion in this country).

That said ... what's happened to this priority? Are we aware of ongoing efforts by the Obama administration to supply aid to these women? Surely in a time when every conceivable industry is getting a bailout, funds should stop flowing to mega-abortion mills like Planned Parenthood (referenced in the article above) and start flowing to pregnancy counseling centers (which provide ultrasounds, immediate care and advice, and adoption alternatives).

Pope John Paul II famously said that "a nation which kills its own children is a nation without hope." Obama, of all people, with his administration and supporters, should understand what the pope is saying. Yes you can.

And if you reading this want to do something about this right now, support the ArborVitae women's and pregnancy help center in Ann Arbor, MI (right by the University of Michigan campus). I know some of the people involved there and, like many pregnancy counseling centers across the U.S., it's always in need.

Ralph McInerny: " Notre Dame has forfeited its right to call itself a Catholic university"

I've said before that I think The Catholic Thing is one of the best-kept Catholic secrets on the Internet. Today they have published one of their most important pieces to date, an essay by the renowned Ralph McInerny, who has been a member of the Notre Dame faculty for over 50 years.

McInerny pulls absolutely no punches in this essay. In fact, it's one of the best modern examples of disdain being used in an appropriate way I have comes across. McInerny has disdain for the decision-makers at Notre Dame who have forfeited their Catholic identity and mission for secular acceptance:

The University of Notre Dame has officially and with much self-satisfaction invited President Barack Obama to address its 2009 graduates and to receive an honorary law degree. Not to put too fine a point on it, this is a deliberate thumbing of the collective nose at the Roman Catholic Church to which Notre Dame purports to be faithful. Faithful? Tell it to Julian the Apostate.

... the invitation to Barack Obama is far from being the usual effort of the university to get into warm contact with the power figures of the day. It is an unequivocal abandonment of any pretense at being a Catholic university. And it is in sad continuity with decades of waffling that have led with seeming inevitability to it.

... ... now we have come to the point where the University of Notre Dame is publicly excluding itself from allegiance to and acceptance of one of the most fundamental of Christian moral truths, mentioned explicitly in the Didache and again and again over the centuries. Abortion is an essentially evil act, both from the viewpoint of natural morality and from the explicit teaching the Church. There is no way in which an individual, a politician or an institution can finesse that fact.

By inviting Barack Obama as commencement speaker, Notre Dame is telling the nation that the teaching of the Catholic church on this fundamental matter can be ignored. Lip service may be paid to the teaching on abortion, but it is no impediment to upward mobility, to the truly vulgar lust to be welcomed into secular society, whether on the part of individuals or institutions.

By inviting Barack Obama to be the 2009 commencement speaker, Notre Dame has forfeited its right to call itself a Catholic university. It invites an official rebuke. May it come.

I am told we can expect other high-respected past and current members of the Notre Dame faculty to similarly strongly speak-out in the days ahead.

Anti-Catholic CT legislators still at it

They should stop while they're behind:

During a meeting to officially kill legislation, including the bill that brought thousands of Catholics to protest last week, the chairmen -- Sen. Andrew J. McDonald, D-Stamford, and Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven -- warned that the General Assembly is in danger of stifling research and debate.

"We hear all sorts of issues that are sometimes great but just too controversial to vote on, some aren't ready for prime time, some that don't have money for them," McDonald said. "I suspect that people on this committee would be very angry if the co-chairs only allowed issues that we support or in our opinion have no constitutional concerns." (Connecticut Post)

Oh sure, let's debate issues that are clearly anti-constitutional....

Wait - WHAT?! Are they on crazy pills?!

40% of US Births were out-of-wedlock in 2007

The stats:

The birth rate rose slightly for women of all ages, and births to unwed mothers reached an all-time high of about 40 percent, continuing a trend begun years ago. More than three-quarters of these women were 20 or older.

... Meanwhile, U.S. abortions have been dropping to their lowest levels in decades, according to other reports. Some have attributed the abortion decline to better use of contraceptives, but other experts have wondered if the rise in births might indicate a failure in proper use of contraceptives. Some earlier studies have shown declining availability of abortions.

... Cesarean section deliveries continue to rise, now accounting for almost a third of all births. Health officials say that rate is much higher than is medically necessary.

"It's the tiniest of baby booms," said Morgan in agreement. "This is not an earthquake; it's a slight tremor." (AP)

And remember - the United States looks a lot different in 2009 than it did in 2007.

Judge compels homeschoolers into public school, cites religion

Just your friendly neighborhood anti-religious-education representative reporting for duty:

A judge in Wake County said three Raleigh children need to switch from home school to public school. Judge Ned Mangum is presiding over divorce proceeding of the children's parents, Thomas and Venessa Mills.

Venessa Mills was in the fourth year of home schooling her children who are 10, 11 and 12 years old. They have tested two years above their grade levels, she said.
"We have math, reading; we have grammar, science, music,” Venessa Mills said.
Her lessons also have a religious slant, which the judge said was the root of the problem.

Of the problems (unfortunately) to be found in this situation, I don't think "religious slant" is one of them.

And while we're on the topic of homeschooling, do check out Homeschool Connections which offers free online seminars for Catholic Homeschool Families.

Frightening: New website exposes where Prop. 8 donors live!

This is very scary .... from a UK Telegraph blogger:

Valleywag is reporting today on a new Google Maps mashup, eightmaps.com, which gives the name and profession of every Proposition 8 donor. It also lists how much they donated and shows where they live.

The site's strapline is distinctly creepy:

"Proposition 8 changed the California state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. These are the people who donated in order to pass it."

In other words, for everyone who is angry that some people don't want homosexual marriage - this website shows them where to direct their attacks. Literally. Frightening.

update: on a perhaps related note, the HBO show "Big Love" aired parts of the temple rites of the Mormon church during their latest episode. Why should we care? Reader James:

"Because to Mormons this is akin to the desecration of the blessed sacrament [to Catholics]. Needless to say, it has caused outrage in the Mormon community ... some theorize that this was done in revenge for the Mormon Church's campaigning for Prop. 8."

Of course, this is not strictly-speaking akin to desecration of the Eucharist, but we still ought to show solidarity with Mormons for the persecution they are receiving because of their Prop. 8 support. This is an issue of justice.

Drastic Parish closings/mergers in Cleveland

A tragic but increasing phenomenon:

More than 50 churches in the Diocese of Cleveland were being informed Saturday that their churches would be closing or merging as part of a Diocese-wide consolidation and reconfiguration.

Cleveland Bishop Richard Lennon on Saturday announced a sweeping reconfiguration of the Diocese, which will result in a net reduction of 52 parishes by June 30, 2010.

Twenty-nine of the Diocese's 224 parishes will close outright, while another 41 have been instructed to merge with one or more neighboring parishes. The reconfiguration will result in the creation of 18 new, combined parishes, which will likely be re-named. (WKYC)

Local WKYC also has a spreadsheet and map of church closings/mergers.

Have you recently been impacted by this process? What are your thoughts about it?

Video: First look inside the world's tallest building

Regular AmP readers know I have a fascination with Dubai, the fastest-growing city in the world (and in history).

It's a city of "mosts", including the most-highest-est building ever, the Burj Dubai:

I post about Dubai every so often.

Ph/t: Deep Thoughts.

Breaking: RNC head Steele says abortion is a "choice"

In an interview with GQ, Michael Steele, the new head of the Republican National Committee says abortion is a choice.

This is very dissapointing news, if it turns out to accurately portray his view on abortion:

How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your Catholic faith but by the fact that you were adopted?
Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that—I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it… Uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.

Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.

Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.

You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.

Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.

Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.

Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!

As a Catholic, Mr. Steele should know better.

More from CMR and Politico.

Photo: GQ.

update: Steele, under fire, walks back 'choice' remark (read to the bottom for Tony Perkins comment)

Modesty back in fashion as economy worsens?

So claims one USA Today reporter:

Modesty in young women's clothing is getting a boost from the dismal economy.

When consumer spending was in overdrive, retailers could sell to the masses and ignore the more muted voices asking for, say, a decent supply of sleeved shirts or prom dresses that show more fabric than skin.

Now, however, it's the rare retailer who's willing to take the chance of turning off any possible customer. Luxury-store clerks can no longer afford to look down at scruffy shoppers, and store owners of every sort are recognizing the one-size-fits-all approach to retail buying no longer works.

Whether it's more of a fiscal or moral shift, understated girls' clothing may indeed be making a comeback.

Even flashy Chanel designer Karl Lagerfeld declared "bling is over" and noted the economy is prompting a "new modesty," in an interview with the International Herald Tribune this year.

Retail consultant Ken Nisch says the trend is more moderation than modesty, but the effect may be the same. (USA Today)

I found it interesting how the reporter described the founding of Pure Fashion (a modesty-promoting organization), which is actually sponsored by Regnum Christi (underlining mine):

Pure Fashion has about 700 members who work as models at spring teen fashion shows, which attract about 11,000 people. The group has affiliates in 10 countries, and is signing new groups on its website, PureFashion.com.

Pure Fashion was an offshoot of a Catholic missionary organization, but Sharman believes its message resonates from Muslims to Orthodox Jews to parents who simply believe it shouldn't be hard to find shorts that completely cover the rear end.

Missionary to the fashionistas, apparently. There's plenty of hearts to convert:

"Everybody's seeing their bottom lines shrinking, so they want to sell to those who wear modest clothing, as well as those who want to wear it in a more risqué manner," says Hoffmann. "And that's fine with us."

I'm sure it is.

update: Pure Fashion is actually one of over a dozen programs sponsored by Regnum Christi.

update 2: I received a report from an RC member saying that Brenda Sharman claims Pure Fashion is "no longer directly affiliated with RC." I'm not sure what to make of that statement because their website still says PF is sponsored by RC and affiliated with their "Mission Network."

Can anyone add a clarification?

Grim times: More Americans say they have no religion

This story broke yesterday, and it was not a terrible surprise (even as it is a terrible reality):

A wide-ranging study on American religious life found that the Roman Catholic population has been shifting out of the Northeast to the Southwest, the percentage of Christians in the nation has declined and more people say they have no religion at all.

Fifteen percent of respondents said they had no religion, an increase from 14.2 percent in 2001 and 8.2 percent in 1990, according to the American Religious Identification Survey. (AP)

Damian Thompson dislikes being right here, but he is:

A huge survey of American religious belief was published today, and the results are devastating for those who believe that the USA, unlike "secular" Europe, will always be a nation of churchgoers.

The percentage of Americans who call themselves Christian has dropped 11 per cent in a generation. And I think this is the beginning of a very long slide.

Non-believers now outnumber every religious group in America except Catholics and Baptists.

... The trend towards religious apathy and improvisation is clearly illustrated by the Obama administration and its supporters: never have there been so many young atheists and agnostics working in the White House and on Capitol Hill. At the moment the Democrats have absorbed most of the non-believers, but secularisation will come to the Republicans, too: don't expect the Religious Right to determine the outcome of future elections.

Folks, we have work to do. And we can start by attending to our own affairs - becoming more faithful ourselves is the first step to renewing our culture. And we must allow Christ to transform ourselves before He can transform others through us. So, know your faith, live your faith, love your faith. That's the papist way.

Connecticut's Anti-Catholic Bill - Update

An update of what has happened recently:

• Knights of Columbus President Carl Anderson on Shredding the First Amendment in the Constitution State. More from the Knights at their Headline Bistro web presence.
• Archbishop Chaput weighs-in: "The legislative coercion directed against the Catholic community in one state has implications for Catholics in every other state. If bigots in one state succeed in coercive laws like SB 1098, bigots in other states will try the same." [More.] [CNA summary.] (What a Bishop!)
• Context: Catholic bishops angry over proposed law
• Here's something: "Senate Republican Caucus Unanimously Opposes SB 1098" [PDF file.]:
  "This bill is an unconstitutional assault on religious freedoms. Specifically, it represents a clear violation of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise of Religion Clause contained in the First Amendment."
• Also, I'm being told that "many in the state are calling for Lawlor and McDonald to be expelled from office due to their EXTREME bias which we have seen repeatedly."
• It's also worth noting that a non-Catholic individual emailed me about their outrage over this bill. As they put it: "if they can come after the Catholic Church and get away with it, nobody is safe." I appreciated the person's pledge of solidarity a great deal. A second individual emailed me and said that, even though they do not always agree with me, they appreciated the thought-provoking nature of my coverage of this issue. Again, this means a great deal to me. In these times such encouragement will serve us in great stead.

My complete coverage is here. Remember: for those in the area, I urge you to make a showing tomorrow at 9AM in Hartford, CT. Support your bishop, support your priests, support the Church we love!

update: LifeSiteNews coverage.

update 2: CNA: Connecticut bill on Catholic Church nearly identical to Voice of the Faithful strategy ... New Tactics: Influencing the Church through Civil Legislation

As promised - Obama overturns Bush policy on stem cells

Common ground my asterisk (*):

Reversing Bush policy, President Barack Obama on Monday cleared the way for a significant increase in federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research and promised no scientific data will be "distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda."

Obama signed the executive order on the divisive stem cell issue and a memo addressing what he called scientific integrity before an East Room audience packed with scientists. He laced his remarks with several jabs at the way science was handled by former President George W. Bush. (AP)

Ryan T. Anderson responds in the Weekly Standard: Obama's decision is bad ethics, bad science, and bad politics. Obama at least stopped short of approving cloning.

More from LifeNews:

The following are several news stories related to President Barack Obama's decision to force taxpayers to fund embryonic stemcell research. The research requires the destruction of human life and has never helped a single patient. On the other hand, alternatives are already in use -- including adult stem cells andinduced pluripotent stem cells -- that are helping patients nowwithout killing days-old unborn children....

• President Barack Obama Makes Taxpayers Fund Embryonic Stem CellResearch
• Pro-Life Groups Blast Obama for Funding Research Destroying HumanLife
• Congress May Fight Battle Over Embryo Research After Obama StemCell Order
• Former Head of NIH: Embryonic Stem Cell Research ProspectsDiminished Now
• Obama Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research Seen as Ideological, Not Scientific

update: The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has released a statement by Cardinal Justin Rigali on President Obama's executive order on embryonic stem cell research.

Becket Fund President calls CT Bill "Doubly unconstitutional"

In response to the story I covered over the weekend about a breathtakingly anti-Catholic CT bill:

"This bill is doubly unconstitutional. It would be unconstitutional underthe First Amendment even if it applied to all churches. but the fact thatit applies to only one church - the Catholic Church - makes itunconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment besides. This is truly amonstrosity."

-- Kevin “Seamus” Hasson, President, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty

Get ready for a deluge of condoms & other contraceptives

All the pieces are lining up:

"The Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s research arm, released a pitch today for more taxpayer funding for ‘family planning services’ – contraception and abortion. Every dollar spent on ‘family planning programs’ saves the American people $4, the study says." - Read a response from the American Life League

LifeNews: "However, the report doesn't appear to square with the facts in places where the number of abortions have been compiled following extensive promotion of family planning."

Ross Douthat: "I admire the persistence with which Will Saletan argues for common ground in the abortion debate, and attempts to sell his fellow liberals on the notion that reducing the abortion rate belongs in the Democratic Party's agenda. But I remain unconvinced that his preferred method for such reductions - a dramatic new push, whether political or cultural, to expand the use of contraception in the United States - would produce anything like the results that he envisions."

"Congress increases "family planning" budget by $95.5 million to whopping $852 million" - Jill Stanek

"Democrats in Congress are not abandoning their overall goal. They plan to push soon for a major funding increase for Title X, the main federal family planning program, as part of broader legislation endorsed by President Barack Obama to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. The Guttmacher report provides ammunition for those who will advocate the funding increase." - AP

"Boston College Students Vote to Demand Free Condoms, Other Birth Control" - Cardinal Newman Society

[From an article promoting condom use]: "And learn to live with the guilt. Hey, I’m Catholic — you can learn to live with guilt. Potentially life-threatening infections and diseases, on the other hand, not so much."

Urban Catholic School enrollment down 27 percent in 20 years

Worse than even the national trend:

Nationwide, the number of students enrolled in urban religious schools declined by 18 percent to about 1.8 million between 1989 and 2006, according to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, an arm of the Department of Education.

Urban Catholic schools were hardest hit, losing 27 percent of their students since 1989, dropping to an enrollment of just over 1 million overall. The Archdiocese of Washington bowed to that trend last spring with the closure of seven of its schools. (DC Examiner)

The cause?

“Unlike 100 years ago, the [Catholic] Church has not made [schools] a top priority,” he added.

100 years ago, Catholic parents weren't contracepting the way they do now (so they had more kids to put through school), the number of religious sisters teaching in schools was dramatically higher, and parish schools never had to be sold off to pay for clergy abuse settlements .... so excuse me if I don't think this is simply a case of misplaced "priorities."

Whose numbers are up, you may wonder?

Of religious institutions, only Islamic and Jewish urban schools saw an increase in enrollment and total number of schools. More than 115,000 students are enrolled in urban Jewish schools, and more than 13,000 students in Islamic schools.

Trends.

Amazing: "Woman gives birth to octuplets in SoCal hospital"

An amazing story, to be sure, and with a surprise:

A woman gave birth Monday to eight babies, only the second time in history octuplets have survived more than a few hours, doctors said.

The mother gave birth to six boys and two girls weighing between 1 pound, 8 ounces, and 3 pounds, 4 ounces, doctors at Kaiser Permanente Bellflower Medical Center said. The hospital had scheduled a Caesarean section for seven babies, but doctors were surprised when an eighth came out at 10:48 a.m.

"My eyes were wide," Dr. Karen Maples said, explaining her reaction to the last birth. (AP)

My heart is saddened, however, by all the euphamisms for abortion used in the last paragraph:

It's easier to control the number of births through in vitro fertilization, which involves combining egg and sperm in a lab dish and transferring the embryo into the uterus. Fertility drugs induce or enhance ovulation and couples often opt for selective reduction, in which women carrying multiple fetuses reduce the number of viable fetuses to two.

Control the number, selective reduction, reduce....

kill.

Listed: President Barack Obama's Pro-Abortion Record

LifeNews.com Editor Steven Ertelt has been working overtime:

"The following is a complication of bill signings, speeches, appointments and other actions that President Barack Obama has engaged in that have promoted abortion before and during his presidency. While Obama has promised to reduce abortions and some of his supporters believe that will happen, this long list proves his only agenda is promoting more abortions." [See the list.]

No, I'm not trying to be pessimistic. I'm trying to remain hopeful despite the evidence.

And in contrast: "President Bush Will Leave Strong Pro-Life Legacy on Abortion, Bioethics"

Krispy Kreme and A.L.L. spark online "Donut Wars"

A couple days ago I blogged about Krispy Kreme's unfortunate decision to offer free "Freedom of Choice" Donuts for Barack Obama's inauguration next week.

In response to KK's announcement, American Life League President Judie Brown released a statement:

"The unfortunate reality of a post Roe v. Wade America is that "choice" is synonymous with abortion access and celebration of 'freedom of choice' is a tacit endorsement of abortion rights on demand."

After plenty of people voiced their non-appreciation of the charged phrasing to KK, the company released a statement which clarified: "On Election Day, November 4, 2008, Krispy Kreme ran a promotion that provided customers with one free star-shaped doughnut at stores nationwide. The Inauguration Day promotion is not about any social or political issue."

I take KK at their word. I think it was unfortunate how they decided to phrase their promotion, because the simple fact of the matter is that "freedom of choice" means something specific in this country's ongoing debate of ideas in the "culture wars."

Unwittingly, however (and here's where it gets interesting) Judie Brown's public comments have uncovered a cesspool of anti-life hate. It really takes your breath away. To my mind, this is a classic example of typically-unarmed (anti-life) combatants jumping at the opportunity to attack pro-life spokespersons.

And are they nasty. Take Jezebel (an online magazine of "Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women"):

"The American Life League has finally discovered the secret, immoral ingredient that makes Krispy Kreme doughnuts so very addictive: fetuses. ... Freedom isn't really free, people, it takes thousands and thousands of aborted, dried up and reconstituted fetuses to make a single box of Krispy Kremes, and the American Life League is determined to stop this abomination!"

I guess Jezebel thinks it's being funny. So much for all people of good will agreeing that abortion is always a painful decision, etc. And of course, this isn't even close to ALL's actual point (I'll get to that).

Or similarly, Wonkette DC Gossip:

"Observe how they use that terrible code word “choice,” which in addition to meaning “being able to decide between one thing or another,” means “mandatory forced abortions for every citizen over the age of five”"

Hmm - which side is really exaggerating?

Or again, the Miami New Times blog:

"File this under "Overreactionary Wing Nuts" and another attempt of conservatives to redefine words for their political means (You can try to rewrite the Constitution, but not the dictionary). Of course, the "overreactionary libtard" counter to this is that conservatives want to demonize all choice from America until we're living under a fundamentalist dictatorship. A fundamentalist dictatorship without doughnuts."

This come-back is especially odd because "freedom of choice" is a liberal-invented euphemism for "abortion on demand" to begin with! Judie Brown is merely pointing out that "freedom of choice" has taken on a specific connotation tied to abortion rights (and other false "rights") and that we should sedulously avoid incorporating it into our common parlance.

But why do I even bother making these finer points? I can't help but think these would be completely lost on the three authors I quote above (and believe me, a blog search shows dozens of anti-lifers gleefully following suit).

This all is just a small taste of what pro-life activists have to put up with, ideologically and rhetorically, on a regular basis. I'm told that Judie Brown has been sent letters threatening her life, and that she's even been accused of racism (huh?!).

We can thank these "donut wars" for giving us a devastatingly-revealing view into the mindset of these opponents of life, a sad glimpse into their hatred and incivility, and a better appreciation of their uncanny ability to miss the point, and then mock the people whose message they are missing.

I mean, come on, did they really think it was just about some stupid donuts?

STDs still on the rise, report says

What, sexual profligacy has consequences?!

In spite of prevention efforts, new cases of some of the most common sexually transmitted diseases are going up, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

.... Based on the report and her own observations, it's safe to say that some of the prevention efforts are not working, Wimberly said. New, innovative methods will be required to get through to this generation of young people, for whom text messaging and the Internet are integral parts of daily life. (CNN)

Abstinence is a pretty darn good prevention method. Plus it's a simple message to text someone.

Catholics shunned at Obama Inauguration

Here in DC it seems that everyone and his brother is coming into town for the Inauguration of Barack Obama.

Well, actually, scratch that. It seems that Catholic clergy aren't being invited to the official events:

Steven Waldman of Beliefnet.com notes that Catholic clergy are conspicuously absent from Barack Obama’s selection of religious leaders invited to participate in his inauguration.

.... While all four of Obama’s picks are Protestants — albeit ones with highly disparate doctrinal outlooks — Beliefnet’s Waldman points out that before 1990 it was routine to include a Catholic representative among clerical inauguration invitees.

.... We suspect Obama’s omission of a Catholic participant was a whole lot more intentional than that. This year’s Democratic National Convention in Denver also notably excluded an invitation to Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver, unlike invitations extended at previous conventions to bishops such as Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles at the DNC in 2000 held in that city.

Why the contemporary reluctance among Democrats to grant Catholic bishops a voice at functions they have organized? Perhaps it’s because they fear that virtually any Catholic bishop they invite will call the nation’s attention to the Democratic Party’s failure to respect the sanctity of life of the unborn, because of the party’s formal commitment to the promotion of abortion rights. (Tom McFeely at National Catholic Register)

Considering how null Obama's personal outreach was to Catholics during his campaign, I'm not surprised we're not being invited to the table now. Our commitment to protecting unborn life would be an awkward sign of contradiction at the festivities, and a reminder that going ahead into the future, there are still issues that deeply (and tragically) divide us.

Probably not.

The Onion strikes again.

(Perfect timing considering.)

Ph/T: AmP reader James.

'Cancer-free' baby born in London, but how "cancer-free"?

Keep track of stories like these, and how they describe with other names what is actually eugenics:

The first child in Britain known to have been screened as an embryo to ensure she did not carry a cancer gene was born Friday, a spokesman for University College London told CNN.

Her embryo was screened in a lab days after conception to check for the BRCA-1 gene, linked to breast and ovarian cancer.

People with the gene are known to have a 50-80 percent chance of developing breast or ovarian cancer in their lifetimes.

British newspapers have dubbed the girl the "cancer-free" baby.

"The parents will have been spared the risk of inflicting this disease on their daughter. The lasting legacy is the eradication of the transmission of this form of cancer that has blighted these families for generations." (CNN)

But here's the reality check: no disease has been cured here. Instead, if the test revealed that the baby girl carried the gene, she would have been destroyeed (and the parents would have presumably tried to conceive again, then re-tested, and on it goes).

Thus, to say "the parents ... have been spared the risk of inflicting this disease on their daughter" is misleading. What the parents were actually spared was "the chance that a daughter with the potential to develop a disease would be allowed to survive until birth."

Two added wrinkles: the testing process can only take place if the baby is conceived in vitro ... and this is the first time a baby has been screened for a likely disease-causing gene as opposed to a guaranteed one.

One sobering line:

"When [the disease] hits your family over and over again, many couples are saying: 'Enough of this. Let's prune this out of our family tree forever.'"

"Prune this out of our family tree forever?"!

Prune disease out all you want, but for heaven's sake, we're talking about pruning people out here!

Cash offered to addicts, alcoholics who agree to sterilization

This is so offensive to the dignity of the human person!

Instead of attempting to cure the cause of people's ills, some are attempting to nullify the inconvenience these people cause to the rest of society:

Folks at downtown's Ronstadt Transit Center on Tuesday afternoon had a way to make a quick $300.

The only stipulation was that the people be drug addicts or alcoholics who agree to long-term birth control.

The group Project Prevention, started by Barbara Harris in 1997, has so far paid more than 2,800 men and women across the nation.

.... Acceptable long-term birth control includes tubal ligation, Depo Provera shots and IUDs for women, or a vasectomy for men. (Tuscon Citizen)

Here's how Project Prevention responds to criticism:

"Those who oppose what we're doing should be willing to step up and adopt a few of the babies," Harris said. "These women can't raise these children."

Don't bother mentioning why people might oppose this.

I wonder how these unfortunate addicted people are going to use this $300 ... oh, that's right.

Newsweek nonsense equates "Jesus has two (Immaculate) Mommies"

Mike Fragoso over at the FRC blog writes a first-class response to Lisa Miller's laughable attempt in Newsweek to deconstruct the traditional Christian vision of Marriage. A sample of Fragoso's response (underlining mine):

[Miller] elides much of the New Testament, and her history is reliant on the quotably wrong Stephanie Coontz. Where does one begin to answer imputations that King David was a homosexual? How can one comprehend-let alone respond to-an argument that first apparently admits Christ's virgin birth and then proceeds to equate the Holy Family to "Jesus has two (Immaculate) Mommies"? The Bible is simply a weapon-at-hand for her preferred policy ends. She's the sort of person Aeflric was worried about.

That underlined equating that "Jesus has two (Immaculate) Mommies" got me thinking: what an antitype that is to the Solemnity of Mary's Immaculate Conception which we Catholics are celebrating today!

It never ceases to amaze me how people can use the same words as we do, and yet completely miss their proper meaning. But there is something deeper in play here: the publication of this article is clearly a result of the California referendum reversing the CA court's decision to allow homosexual marriage, which subsequently caused progressive secularists to attack traditional Christian churches for their continued resistance to state-mandated homosexual "marriage."

What happens when these secular progressives try to do theology? Little gems like this:

"We cannot look to the Bible as a marriage manual, but we can read it for universal truths as we struggle toward a more just future."

How wonderfully Hegelian. Problem is, universal truths and justice itself are not separated from individual acts, which either bring about justice, or defeat it. Sorry to be a bother - but that's what Christ actually revealed.

Theology a la Miller, part deux:

"More basic than theology, though, is human need."

Actually, nothing is deeper than theology in this sense: theology reveals to us that human need is placed within us by God, and that His love is the only answer to the deepest yearnings (needs) of the human heart.

But if you have convinced yourself that your deepest yearning is to witness the legalization of homosexual "marriage", than sure, theology is inconvenient.

And so is the biblical teaching on marriage.

update: well isn't this interesting. Politico is reporting (in a very popular story) that Newsweek is catching alot of heat for this (cover)story:

Leading social conservatives blasted Newsweek for its current cover story, "The Religious Case for Gay Marriage," which they said misinterprets both biblical scripture and their own political movement.

.... Tony Perkins, president of the socially conservative Family Research Council, agreed, calling Newsweek’s cover story “yet another attack on orthodox Christianity. I hardly think that Newsweek is a credible venue for theological discussion,” said Perkins. “I mean, I thought it was just full of holes.”

And yes, that's the same Family Research Council I mention in this same post.

What really gets me is the way the Newsweek editors are being defiant on the issue, as if Miller's argument actually holds any theological weight. I'm sorry, but such a stand would just be laughed off the soapbox if we were encountering an objective debate here. Instead, we are witnessing an ideologically-driven deconstruction of Christian teaching and tradition.

Arguing that the Christian vision of marriage ought not to influence American legislation is one thing, but denying the Christian vision of marriage in its essence ... that's another (and mute) topic.

[photo credit: Flickr user Steve Rhodes]

"Couples staying together because of poor economy"

Aw, shucks:

Running into your ex is almost always awkward and stressful. David Snyder and Nancy Partridge deal with it nearly every day.

The Denver couple divorced after six years of marriage but have been forced to live together for months because they can't sell their place or afford to set up separate households in this slumping economy.

Snyder gets the master bedroom, while Partridge gets a smaller one. Snyder watches TV on one end of the house, Partridge on the other. The two split the grocery bill and kitchen duties. Sometimes they eat dinner together, sometimes apart. There are awkward silences, or worse.

"We've had tremendous arguments over things like who gets to park in the garage, but at this point, it's kind of settling down into a routine," said Partridge, 45, who works in public relations. (AP)

"Settling down into a routine"? I hope they realize that this newfound ability to resolve conflcits could have disastrously favorable effects on their marriage ... okay, so it's probably too late, but I'm just sayin'.

Stupid Stocking Stuffer: Chocolate Jesus

German churches have criticized a businessman for selling thousands of chocolates shaped like Jesus.

The candies come from Frank Oynhausen’s "Sweet Lord" chocolate-making business, which wraps the figures in gold foil.

“I started thinking about how I could reintroduce traditional religious values into this commercial world," Oynhausen states on his web site.

The figures at present are custom-produced, costing about $190 for almost a quarter pound. Oynhausen expressed hopes of mass producing the product and exporting it for sale in countries such as the U.S.

The German Protestant Church criticized the idea as “tasteless.”

Aegidius Engel, a spokesman for the Catholic Archdiocese of Paderborn, was also critical, saying:

"It is terrible that Jesus is being wrapped up in gold foil and sold along with chocolate bunnies, edible penguins and lollipops."

"This is ruining the symbol of Jesus himself," he added, according to Reuters. (CNA)

Barf.

A student culture of plagiarism

Some sobering statistics that sadly jive with what I hear from teachers:

Cheating in school is rampant and getting worse. Sixty-four percent of students cheated on a test in the past year and 38 percent did so two or more times, up from 60 percent and 35 percent in a 2006 survey. Thirty-six percent said they used the Internet to plagiarize an assignment, up from 33 percent in 2004. (AP)

Plagiarism is also encouraged by teachers who aren't as vigilant as they should be. After all, students are far less likely to try cheating if they don't think they'll be able to get away with it in the first place.

Not like that's any excuse....

What about Twilight?

If you look at the movie Box Office returns from last weekend, there's a big surprise....

.... it's the movie Twilight. I'm rather disturbed by its huge success, because I've heard nothing good about the book it is based on.

A Catholic mother blogging about the book and movie over at Spes Unica has this to say:

"The Twilight Saga is an international sensation, but unlike other recent blockbusters (for example, the Harry Potter series), this fan base tilts very, very heavily towards females. (One fan site listed a ratio of 31 registered females for every male, and I would venture to say it may be optimistic about the number of males.) The series has been carefully marketed as a courtly romance based on old fashioned morals, but this is simply untrue. It is driven by eroticism and obsession, contains explicit sexual situations and violence, and disturbing spiritual content which concludes in a “happy ending” where the heroine of the story gives up her soul to become a vampire." (Read More)

So be advised - Twilight is dark for a reason.

update: it's evident from the comment thread that other Catholics view this series favorably, for instance the USCCB review, and pro-life chastity blogger Kate Bryan.

Since I have not read the books or seen the movie, nor do I have a particular interest in the genre, I'll refrain from commenting and allow AmP readers to pursue the debate who are closer to it.

I would say, speaking as an outsider, that this genre of film in general contains unsavory elements, and so if it is good, that means it has an uphill battle. But for all that, it would be encouraging to see that there is an entry that features acceptable moral values for a chance. Otherwise it's just another teen vampire movie. Blech.

Radical pro-abort picked for Obama communications

Put your friends in high places:

Ellen Moran, executive director of EMILY’s List, was named White House communications director by President-elect Obama on Saturday. Moran, a well-known grassroots organizer, has also managed statewide Democratic campaigns and managed the Wal-Mart corporate accountability campaign for the AFL-CIO. EMILY's List, one of the most important Democratic constituency groups, says it is "dedicated to building a progressive America by electing Democratic pro-choice women to office." (Politico)

Even when phrased in saccharine political-speak, there's no real masking the fact that Emily's List pushes pro-abortion candidates, period:

EMILY's List - which stands for "Early Money Is Like Yeast" (It makes the dough rise) -was formed more than two decades ago to support pro-choice women candidates. Over the years they'd raised millions for them. They helped, among others, political tyros like Diane Feinstein, Jennifer Granholm and Clinton (during her Senate run) reach their desired end.

EMILY's List also states being "committed to a three-pronged strategy to elect pro-choice Democratic women: recruiting and funding viable women candidates; helping them build and run effective campaign organizations; and mobilizing women voters to help elect progressive candidates across the nation."

For a candidate to be considered for funding from EMILY’s List there are three requirements: The candidate must be a woman; she must be a Democrat; and she must support unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

The List’s support for abortion-on-demand is so strong that it has cut funding from politicians who voted against extreme pro-abortion positions. Two examples of this are Senators Mary Landrieu from Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln from Arkansas who lost funding from EMILY’s List when they voted to ban the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion. (CNA)

Once again - these are Obama's friends.

Fed Pledges Top $7.4 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit

Happy Monday:

The U.S. government is prepared to lend more than $7.4 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers, or half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, to rescue the financial system since the credit markets seized up 15 months ago.

... The money that’s been pledged is equivalent to $24,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. It’s nine times what the U.S. has spent so far on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Congressional Budget Office figures. It could pay off more than half the country’s mortgages.

No words.

Cardinal Ratzinger had some good ones.

"Change you can conceive in"?

Newsweek asks the question "Could euphoric Obama fans be sparking a baby boom?"

Clearly, Newsweek and I differ as to what sort of things can be counted as part of a "baby boom":

In Chicago, where 28-year-old Chip Bouchard—a former Hillary supporter—attended Obama's acceptance speech, he says he looked over at his boyfriend, Chris, and thought: "This [is] the president under whom I [want to] get married and adopt a baby."

So many things to say to that, but not now.

Back to the "baby boom" ... sorry, agreeing with Jill, I think we can more expect an "abortion boom".

Cardinal: Obama is "Aggressive, Disruptive and Apocalyptic"

Cardinal Stafford made some noise on the CUA campus last week:

His Eminence James Francis Cardinal Stafford criticized President-elect Barack Obama as “aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic,“ and said he campaigned on an “extremist anti-life platform,” Thursday night in Keane Auditorium during his lecture “Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II: Being True in Body and Soul.“

“For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden,” Stafford said, comparing America’s future with Obama as president to Jesus’ agony in the garden. “On November 4, 2008, America suffered a cultural earthquake.” (The Tower)

And in completely unrelated news: earthquake swarms today in the Western US.

update: Andrew Sullivan goes on a tear after he hears about the Cardinal's comments:

"The Vatican hierarchy has become radicalized under Benedict and John Paul II - so much so that they see the West since the 1960s as entirely a creature of resistance to Humanae Vitae, the papal declaration that all non-procreative sex is a moral evil."

First of all, the phenomenon of dissent from the teaching of Humanae Vitae is actually (and I would add, accurately) understood by many in the hierarchy as an important symptom of deeper historical issues. Of course it's not all about Humanae Vitae, but at the same time, it's amazing how well the document managed to frame the major conflicts of that time. And frankly, not just that time, but our own age as well!

Also, Sullivan barely seems to understand what Humanae Vitae actually teaches .... "All non-procreative sex is a moral evil"? Sorry - that summary would get a failing grade if it was submitted by a kid in high school religion class. Which brings me back to my old phrase: Before you criticize the Church, try to understand her.

And to think, Sullivan plaintively asks if someone could "talk some sense" into us....?

Photo: The "Obama Votive"

Source, NRO: "A reader took this picture today at a street fair at Hayes and Octavia in San Francisco, of all places."

What if Obama wins?

Deal Hudson says:

Many Catholics will finally realize, and admit to, the power of the political left in their Church. This will lead to a stark red state, blue state divide among Catholics in the U.S., which will be wider and deeper than what we presently see.

..This network has become very adept at cloaking its dissent, its political intentions, and its disdain for the agenda of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I won't go into details because it has been chronicled often, but there are a growing number of Catholics willing to believe it because of this election.

Steve Ertelt follows through.

I have one prediction to add:

Some vocal Catholics have been promising, with increasing-intensity, that Obama will bring about a renaissance of Catholic social teaching in action, and that it is morally imperative for Catholics to help him bring this about by voting for him on November 4th.

My prediction? Come November 5th, we'll never hear from them again.

... that is, until November 2012.

on a related note:

For an example of the selective pandering that is being given to pew Catholics, consider this press release from the group "Catholic Democrats" that dropped in my inbox yesterday:

"Catholic Democrats calls on McCain campaign to acknowledge the fundamental right to health care - [because] Catholic Bishops recognize "a fundamental human right," an approach to health care advanced throughout Obama's career."

Given the economic climate, one can reasonably argue about whether Obama's mandate or McCain's tax credit plan will provide coverage to more people.

On the other hand, Obama's record of opposition to the Church's teachings on abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and cloning (to name a few), is absolutely indisputable.

And in fact, the Church's teaching about health care presumes that this health care protects the unborn, does not seek unethical cures through embryonic stem cell research or cloning.

So run that by me again - how exactly has Obama been advancing a form of health care acceptable to Catholics throughout his career?

New polling claims Younger Christians becoming more liberal

I received an initiation to participate in a conference call yesterday explaining the results of new polling data acquired by the "progressive" religions group Faith in Public Life (founded after the '04 elections), on young evangelicals and Catholics. Unfortunately prior duties prevented me from participating.

The results are online here (PDF).

I have something to say in response to each one of their conclusions.

But, because this is a topic very close to myself and one of the ongoing goals of AmP (to provide news, quality commentary and content for young Catholics living in America), I'll probably spend a bit more time on this report and try to get something on it published (you'll hear about that when it happens).

In the meantime, what are your observations?

Related previous AmP topics:

• Commentary: If Liberal Catholicism is Dead, then the Youth Killed It (May 7)
• Report: "Younger Catholics Becoming Increasingly Liberal, Studies Show" (February 17)
• Cardinal Pell on the signs of hope among young conservative Catholics (May 2006)

In Obama's crosshairs: Abortion alternatives

LifeNews:

Pregnancy centers across the country that provide women with abortion alternatives could be shut down or face severe regulations if Barack Obama wins next month. That's because a bill targeting pregnancy centers could easily be approved in a pro-abortion Congress and land on Obama's desk.

Obama has already promised pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL that he will be their lap dog in the White House and these are the groups leading the effort to pass the bill.

Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey reintroduced the bill in April in the Senate and issued a statement alleging that pregnancy centers mislead women by giving them information on abortion's risks and alternatives.

The so-called "Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act" would place burdensome regulations on pregnancy centers.

It would also force the Federal Trade Commission to create and enforce rules to prohibit deceptive practices that pregnancy centers say they never use to reach women -- such as advertising under the "abortion services" section of the phone book.

I don't think it's that unlikely a scenario. Pregnancy centers are a huge factor in immediatly, effectively reducing the incidence of abortion in this country. They are, morever, in the eyes of Planned Parenthood and professional abortion providers - "competition" in the reproductive services market. And we all know that PP doesn't mind bending and breaking the rules when it can get away with it.

"Pope Benedict: unlike great banks, the Word of God doesn't fail"

Filling-out what he was quoted as saying earlier:

On Monday Pope Benedict XVI briefly remarked on the financial crisis during the opening of the first General Congregation of the Twelfth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops. In the aftermath of the “fall of the great banks,” he reminded synod attendees that money is of “secondary importance” to the Word of God, which he called the “foundation of all reality.”

The Pope referenced Christ’s words at the close of the Sermon on the Mount in which he speaks of building one’s house’s foundation upon sand or upon rock.

“Those who build on sand do so only on visible and tangible things: on success, career and money,” the Pope explained. “These seem to true reality, but one day they will pass away", he continued. (CNA)

I found this metaphor helpful as I attempted to wrap my head around what's happening, though it sometimes feels the quicksand. Of course, it is only by appreciating these things as "secondary" that we are free to understand them better.

Picture: Hallmark rolls out gay marriage cards

Well so much for buying Hallmark:

Most states don't recognize gay marriage -- but now Hallmark does.

The nation's largest greeting card company is rolling out same-sex wedding cards -- featuring two tuxedos, overlapping hearts or intertwined flowers, with best wishes inside. "Two hearts. One promise," one says.

...The language inside the cards is neutral, with no mention of wedding or marriage, making them also suitable for a commitment ceremony. Hallmark says the move is a response to consumer demand, not any political pressure.

...Hallmark started offering "coming out" cards last year, and the four designs of same-sex marriage cards are being gradually released this summer and will be widely available by next year. No sales figures were available yet. (AP)

(Road)Sign of the Times: "drive thru" churches

Proving the adage, "Where there's a market, there's a way"....:


From the UK Times' Faith Central:

.... we are happy to present a selection of drive-thru churches, all nicely unselfconscious, including a unique (sadly closed) funeral parlour in Pensacola where mourners can say their farewells through a glass window without troubling to get out of the car.

CS Lewis would not approve. In the Screwtape Letters he points out that "we are animals, and what our bodies do affects our minds". I.e. if you kneel to pray (or at least get out of your car) you might pray better.

These are protestant initiatives, which take place in the United States. I'm proud of the author for the classic C.S. Lewis reference, which is highly applicable to the situation.

An example of these "drive thru" outfits:

This drive-in Christian Church is a converted drive-in movie theatre in Daytona Beach. The minister delivers his message from a high balcony just below where the movie screen once hung. According to National Catholic Reporter, the congregation attracts an average of 700 people every week. To hear the service, worshipers must tune 88.5 FM. As you can see .... churchgoers receive a packaged Communion kit where they can find some wine for the worship.

Sure enough, the beginning of the report filed in 2003 by the National Catholic Reporter:

"Ever get to church and wish you could just stay in the car? Here, you can."

Blech, I can't read anymore. I feel like I'm getting car sick.