Daily Archives: February 10, 2009

A "pro-life" columnist for US News argues in favor of embryonic stem cell research

Mary Kate Cary writes a piece in U.S. News and World Report justifying the ‘pro-life’ merits of ESCR by comparing it to organ donation and using the “the IVF embryos will be destroyed, anyway” argument. Of course, she misses the point that IVF itself is not in accordance with the Natural Law. That of course is a problem with using the term “pro-life,” since one could argue that IVF is “pro-life” in one sense of the word (as Cary, and many others, have done). But it is not in accordance with human dignity.

More interestingly, Cary points out that President Barack Obama has yet to sign an executive order allowing for funding of embryonic stem cell research.

Advertisements

Pro-Life Speaker shouted down at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia

“Saint Mary’s is proud of its heritage as the oldest English speaking Roman
Catholic university in Canada. ” (History)

That’s funny, since I had to dig around their website and get to this sentence in the history to find out that this is a “Catholic” university.

Even more funny, since the university recently shut down a pro-life lecture in response to a student mob.

Jojo Ruba, a speaker for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, came to the university at the behest of its student pro-life group to give a lecture called “Echoes of the Holocaust,” in which he shows the parallels between the pro-abortion movement and the Holocaust.

30 anti-life protestors showed up and shouted down Ruba and cursed him. This account also includes a video of the event. University officials arrive and, rather than arresting the protestors for their unruly behavior, ordered the event to be shut down and told the students to go home. A smaller group of pro-life students and Ruba went to a nearby Church and finished the meeting.

Lesley-Anne Steeleworthy, who is chairwoman of the board at the women’s
centre at the university, said the lecture topic was “anti-choice” and offensive
on “a number of levels.”

Isn’t a Catholic university supposed to be what she calls “anti-choice”?

“It is shocking,” Ms. Steeleworthy said Sunday. “It’s comparing women who want
the right to choose to being as evil as Hitler.”

You mean, it’s comparing women who want the right to choose to kill babies to be as evil as Hitler.

So, the feminazi group, which of course is all about violating the most basic of human rights–the right to life–is threatening to file a “human rights” complaint against the University. Meanwhile, the pro-life group is *also* planning a human rights complaint that their event was shut down summarily.

Why is it OK to deny Catholics’ history?

You know, I’ve never understood the point of denying the Holocaust. I can understand, given the way the Holocaust was covered up by the World–including the West–why people might find the historical record inconsistent. Consider the way abortion is covered up today or the way that slavery was represented 150 years ago.

However, it is amazing how hot-under-the-collar people get about Holocaust denial.

Every day, we hear about “Galileo,” or about “the Inquisition,” or about “the Dark Ages,” or various versions of history that have been spread by Protestants and atheists in order to discredit Catholicism, in spite of evidence to the contrary (e.g., that the Spanish Inquisition was the most progressive legal system of its day).

Never mind the history of oppression of Irish Catholics and other populations in the US and the British Empire. Never mind the bloody persecution of Christians that goes on today in Muslim and Communist countries.

And then, of course, to many Jewish activists, it constitutes “holocaust denial” to talk about Catholics who died in the Holocaust. In their view, Catholics who died in the Holocaust, like St. Maximilian Kolbe and St. Edith Stien, “deserved it”.

Why is it OK to “deny” that stuff?