A powerful speech. Even if you don’t usually watch videos online, you really should listen to this one. It speaks for itself, especially regarding judging others. It’s a talk by genetics pioneer, Down syndrome researcher and outspoken pro-life leader Dr. Jerome Lejeune, whose Cause is being initiated, telling a powerful story about the dangers of judging based upon appearances, and the problem of eugenics:
Posted in abortion, Catholicism, Culture Wars, Disability, eugenics, euthanasia, human dignity, infanticide, intrinsic evil, Lewis Crusade, medical ethics, Natural law, Pro-Life, worth of the disabled
When Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann warned of “Death Panels” if Obamacare passed, liberals and some conservatives balked at this “slippery slope” “conspiracy theory,” saying that it was hogwash, there were no “death panels” in the bill (a bill that no one apparently ever read), etc.
Well, Kathleen “Tiller the Killer paid for my career” Sebelius says that “reduction in the number of human beings is a cost containment goal of Obamacare.”
And liberals are now talking about “After Birth Abortion.”
Go figure when we have a president who actively opposed protecting protection of babies who survived abortion, who accused Jill Stanek of lying (and liberals take for granted that Stanek was “discredited,” even though she wasn’t), when even Hillary Clinton and NARAL refused to take a position on born-alive protection. Obama has stated that infanticide is necessary to protect the “right to an abortion,” and we know liberals think abortion is necessary to protect the “right to contraception,” but slippery slopes are logical fallacies. Yeah, right.
Posted in abortion, Barack Obama, Demonocrats, health care, heretics, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, infanticide, liberal hypocrisy, Natural law, Politics, Pro-Life
It’s the question “pro-choice” people hate to address. It forces them to examine what they really stand for. I’ve applied it, Socratically, in many an online discussion to get one of the following results:
1. The person tries to say I’m improperly using Socratic logic or analogy.
2. The person says the question is absurd and refuses to answer it
3. The person is honest and admits there are standards by which he or she would deny the right to life to a born person.
So, the question is:
“Is it OK to kill blind people?”
Presumably, the person will say, of couse not.
To this, I respond,
“Well, then, the lack of sight doesn’t deprive one of the right to live?”
“OK, well, what about the lack of hearing? mobility? and so on.”
What faculty do you believe is necessary for a person to have human rights?
At what point does the loss of some particular faculty deprive one of human rights?
After all, an unborn baby is deprived of the right to life merely because of some missing faculty. For many who support abortion, especially our president, that missing faculty is visibility. Wait–for Barack Obama, it’s not even visibility, since he says it’s OK to starve or suffocate newborn babies to death if they’re born in “botched” abortions.
And for the average person who *has* an abortion, visibility is the missing factor, because people don’t take the time to think about such things.
Posted in abortion, analogy, Barack Obama, Culture Wars, Disability, euthanasia, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, infanticide, intrinsic evil, Logic, Politics, Pro-Life
One of the most powerful pro-life talks I’ve ever attended was given by Dr. John Bruchalski of the Tepeyac Clinic, several years ago at adult education night at St. William of York in Stafford, VA. He shared a lot of the “inside scoop” as a medical professional, a revert who used to work in the clinic that pioneered in vitro fertilization in the US. I’ve discussed some of these before, but it doesn’t hurt to repeat.
Some of the key points:
1. There will never be a male contraceptive on the market. Whenever they test a male contraceptive pill, the test subjects did not like what it did to them, how shall we say, aesthetically. The estrogen pill doubles a woman’s risk of stroke or heart attack and increases the risk of various cancers. Any other drug with the estrogen pill’s side effects would be pulled from the market. Double standard, anyone?
2. When conception occurs, the newly formed embryo sends out an electrical impulse to tell the mother’s brain, “Hey! I’m here!” It is possible to detect pregnancy within moments of fertilization, since there are *immediate* changes to the mother’s biochemistry. When conception occurs in a petri dish, there is a visible flash of light. He says that, back when he worked at the IVF lab, they used to watch and wait for that flash of light, and they would cheer.
3. On January 22, 1973, he came home from school and found his father dressed in his funeral clothes. He asked him who died, and his father said, “I am in mourning for America, because today America legalized abortion.”
Posted in abortion, Catholicism, contraception, health care, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, In Vitro Fertilization, infanticide, intrinsic evil, medical ethics, Natural Family Planning, Natural law, Pro-Life, research, sex, Theology of the Body
I am pro-life.
Here’s how I prioritize my vote:
1. I oppose contraception–if I find that rare politician who does, he or she has my vote, hands down.
2. I oppose abortion, completely. I vote for the *MOST* anti-abortion candidate: I’ll vote for an “incrementalist” or “some exceptions candidate,” but I’m going to vote for the person who’s going to do the *most* to outlaw abortion. If it’s a choice between someone who’s anti-abortion but pro-ESCR and someone who’s anti-both, I’ll vote for the latter.
3. If the positions on abortion are relatively equal, and depending upon the office, I’ll consider the death penalty, torture and war. For example, I care far more about the death penalty if I’m voting for a judge or district attorney. I really don’t care about a district attorney’s position on war, but I care more about a presidential candidate’s position on war than his position on the death penalty.
4. If all of the above are equal, then I’m going to look at candidates’ positions on marriage, education, and parental rights. I supported Mike Huckabee in the 2008 primary because he calls for getting rid of “no fault” divorce and he supports laws that favor homeschooling.
5. After all these, if it gets down to nuances between candidates with similar views on all the above issues, I’ll look at their positions on “dignity of the human person” issues such as disability rights, welfare and the environment.
Posted in abortion, activism, Barack Obama, Clintons, conservatism, contraception, Culture Wars, death penalty, Demonocrats, Disability, Distributism, ESCR, eugenics, euthanasia, health care, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, infanticide, intrinsic evil, medical ethics, Natural law, Politics, Pro-Life, vaccines, war, worth of the disabled
I believe in a consistent life ethic, but I’d rather use Fr. Frank Pavone’s analogy of a house (some issues are foundational; some issues are pillars; some issues are the roof; and some are the walls and decorations) than the “seamless garment” of Eileen Egan and Joseph Cardinal Bernardin. Apparently, Bernardin’s seamless garment tore when he worked to cover up the still-unsolved 1983 murder of a church organist who had documentation of the active homosexual subculture in the Chicago priesthood and was about to go to the media.
Anyway, the Church is very clear that there are times when war and the death penalty are necessary–even Jesus Himself says so (Mt 18:6).
But there is no justification for abortion. There is no justification for killing the disabled. There is no justification for killing people on the basis of religion, race, sexual orientation or gender.
Oh, by the way, in all the complaints about oppressed minorities, and in all the media complaints about the lack of justice for victims of crimes committed *by* priests, when are we going to start hearing about the many crimes committed *against* priests? When are we going to hear about the the murders of Catholic priests by KKK members in the “Old South,” unsolved or otherwise unresolved?
Posted in abortion, activism, apologetics, bishops, Catholicism, Culture Wars, death penalty, Demonocrats, Disability, ESCR, eugenics, euthanasia, health care, human dignity, humanity of the unborn, In Vitro Fertilization, infanticide, intrinsic evil, liberal hypocrisy, liberation theology, medical ethics, Politics, Pro-Life, sex, Theology of the Body, USCCB, vaccines, war, worth of the disabled
Recently, one of my Facebook friends mused whether going shopping with her husband without any kids constituted a ‘date.’
I replied that Mary and I have gotten to the point that any situation involving 2 or less kids is a “date.” Someone else concurred, noting that she and her husband have had the same thought when out with “only” 2 kids–along with the thought that, for many people, that’s their entire family.
I love hanging out with my kids, and I love going places with them. I love having them there in the day when Mary’s working. I love having their company on expeditions during the day.
“Come on, let’s go on an adventure!”
“I hate adventures!” said Joe (3 at the time)
“Why’s that?” I asked.
“Cause adventure means grocery shopping!”
I was reflecting once last year about how boring it will be when they’re all grown up and gone.