Head of USCCB Meets with Obama: Also Releases Video Saying Decision on Conscience Protection a Move Towards "Despotism"

By John Jalsevac
March 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

On the same day that Cardinal Francis George released a video expressing, on the behalf of all American bishops, his deep concern about the Obama administration's decision to rescind conscience protection regulations put in place by the Bush administration, he has met with President Obama at the White House.

News of the private, half-hour meeting between the two was only released late this afternoon. The meeting was not included in President Obama's daily schedule.

The statements from the White House and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) give few details about what the Cardinal and the President spoke about, although the timing of the release of the Cardinal's video may indicate that the conscience protection regulations were at the top of the agenda.

"The president and Cardinal George discussed a wide range of issues," stated the White House release, "including important opportunities for the government and the Catholic Church to continue their long-standing partnership to tackle some of the nation's most pressing challenges."

The statement from the USCCB said: "The meeting was private. Cardinal George and President Obama discussed the Catholic Church in the United States and its relation to the new administration."

Cardinal George, the president of the USCCB, taped the video released today after the Obama Administration announced in early March that it was rescinding the regulations which guarantee that health workers cannot be forced to provide services that violate their consciences, including abortions.

"As Catholic bishops and American citizens, we are deeply concerned that such an action on the government's part would be the first step in moving our country from democracy to despotism," says the Cardinal in the video.

"Respect for personal conscience and freedom of religion as such ensures our basic freedom from government oppression. No government should come between an individual person and God - that's what America is supposed to be about. This is the true common ground for us as Americans. We therefore need legal protection for freedom of conscience and of religion-including freedom for religious health care institutions to be true to themselves."

The Cardinal observed that the country respects conscientious objection in the case of those who object to war, "even though it's good to defend your country," and for physicians who do not want to participate in the death penalty.

"Why shouldn't our government and our legal system permit conscientious objection to a morally bad action, the killing of babies in their mother's womb?" he asks. "People understand what really happens in an abortion and in related procedures - a living member of the human family is killed - that's what it's all about - and no one should be forced by the government to act as though he or she were blind to this reality."

The Cardinal concluded by urging concerned citizens to contact the government and tell them to retain the conscience protection regulations: "I ask you please to let the government know that you want conscience protections to remain strongly in place. In particular, let the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington know that you stand for the protection of conscience, especially now for those who provide the health care services so necessary for a good society. "

A 30 day public comment period on the administration's decision to rescind the conscience protection regulations is currently underway. Comments may be submitted by email at proposedrescission@hhs.gov.

So Much For the "Mythical" Freedom of Choice Act

Commentary by Deal W. Hudson
March 9, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

Many Democrats are wise enough to have a healthy fear of FOCA, the Freedom of Choice Act. Those on the religious left who support President Barack Obama are particularly sensitive to the symbolic power of FOCA to undercut their messaging about "abortion reduction." If FOCA were to cause much-beloved Catholic hospitals to begin shutting their doors, the political impact would be devastating.

Thus, it came as no surprise several weeks ago when some of Obama's religious supporters began accusing pro-lifers -- particularly Catholics -- of using FOCA as a scare tactic when it had not yet been introduced into the 111th Congress.

Amy Sullivan, an editor at TIME, wrote an article titled, "The Catholic Attack on a Mythical Abortion Bill," singling out the U.S. Catholic bishops for their national postcard campaign against FOCA. Catholics United was predictably quoted in the story, as they are now in every media story giving pro-abortion Catholics political cover: "These right-wing organizations are deliberately misleading people in order to stoke the culture war."

Sullivan, who wrote a good book about the "God gap" in the Democratic Party, went way out on a limb to defuse FOCA anxiety. "Congress," she wrote, "isn't about to pass the Freedom of Choice Act -- because no such bill has been introduced in the current Congress." True, but as Sullivan surely knows, there are several members of Congress who are itching to reintroduce FOCA, regardless of any misgivings Democratic strategists may have about its consequences in the 2010 election.

For the abortion lobby, the passage of FOCA is the holy grail of their activism, and the just desserts for their strenuous -- and expensive -- efforts on behalf of Obama.

FOCA, as it turns out, is going to be reintroduced in the not-so-distant future. On March 6, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told the St. Louis Post Dispatch that FOCA "is among the congressman's priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later."

Ilan Kayatksy, the spokesman, added that Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) would introduce the same bill in the Senate "with some minor tweaks." (Representative Nadler introduced FOCA in the 108th and 110th sessions of Congress.)

Three weeks earlier, an unnamed spokesman for Representative Nadler had told Sullivan at TIME that FOCA would not be reintroduced "anytime soon." It sounds as if Nadler's staff needs to get its story straight. At the same time, the conflicting statements coming from the same congressional office represent the division among Democrats about the wisdom of making FOCA a legislative priority.

But whether or not FOCA reaches the floor of the Congress this session may not make much difference: Obama might get everything he wants without the bill. He has been using Friday nights to issue statements about his plans to overturn restrictions on abortion and its funding (Friday being the best time to damp down media coverage). This past Friday, Obama announced he will sign an executive order requiring federal money be spent on embryonic stem cell research, removing all the restrictions placed by the Bush administration.

Friday-night statements from the White House may eventually approximate the outcome of FOCA without the controversial bill ever ending up on the president's desk.

Obama to Revoke Bush Abortion Rule Protecting Conscience Rights

By Tim Waggoner
WASHINGTON, February 27th, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

President Barack Obama is poised to rescind a policy that protects the conscience rights of American health care workers.

The controversial rule was put into place as one of the last acts of the Bush administration and came into effect on January 20 of this year, the same day as President Obama's inauguration. The rule was universally condemned by the pro-abortion lobby who argued that allowing physicians to opt out of controversial services or procedures would endanger women's health.

The policy protects health care workers from being forced to perform and provide controversial services that conflict with their personal, moral and religious beliefs. Without the policy, doctors, nurses and others could be forced to participate in abortions or to dispense the abortifacient morning after pill, even if to do so would violate their core beliefs.

The proposal to rescind the Bush rule was quietly put forward by the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department today.

An anonymous official from the HHS announced the measure this morning, saying, "We've been concerned that the way the Bush rule is written it could make it harder for women to get the care they need."

The decision was welcomed by pro-abortion leaders.

Nancy Keenan of the pro-abortion group NARAL said, "We have a long way to go before we fully undo Bush's anti-choice legacy, but President Obama's action today is a giant step forward."

"Today's action by the Obama administration demonstrates that this president is not going to stand by and let women's health be placed in jeopardy," said Cecile Richards, head of the Planned Parenthood Federation.

Proponents of the rule, however, say its removal will violate the legitimate reservations of millions of American health workers and have condemned Obama for beginning his presidency by pursuing a radically anti-life agenda.

Father Thomas J. Euteneuer, president of Human Life International (HLI), today lambasted President Obama for his decision to reverse the Bush administration policy.

"Any pretense of 'moderation' on life issues was long ago dispensed with," said Fr. Euteneuer. "With the rescinding of the Mexico City Policy, the appointment of dozens of radical anti-life cabinet members and staff, the enormous increase in funding for contraception and irresponsible sex advocacy, and now these grave insults to human life and dignity … one shudders to think what could be next."

"It's as if the president and Congress are trying to outdo each other for the dishonor of who can forward the most extreme anti-life agenda," said Father Euteneuer.

"Like everyone who believes in human dignity, I am tired of these cowards in Congress trying to sneak these destructive, anti-life measures into bills that are supposed to be helping our country emerge from this recession," said Fr. Euteneuer. "And I'm tired of President Obama's 'Choice for me, but not for thee' hypocrisy. His audacity is not of hope, but of the destruction of freedom and human life."

Archbishop Chaput Speaks on Abortion, Obama, and Catholic Responsibility

By Steve Jalsevac
TORONTO, Ontario, February, 25, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

On a bitter cold February 23rd night at St. Basils Church on the campus St. Michael's College, the University of Toronto, Denver Archbishop Charles J. Chaput delivered to a near capacity audience what was likely the most forthright and challenging talk on Catholic political responsibility ever given in Canada by a bishop.

The Archbishop had been invited to address the themes from his book, "Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life." He presented some background and thoughts on the book and then discussed the US election and the meaning of true hope.

Chaput began by noting the powerful negative effect of today's culture on the public's ability to think clearly about political implications and responsibilities. He stated, "American consumer culture is a very powerful narcotic. Moral reasoning can be hard, and TV is a great painkiller. This has political implications. Real freedom demands an ability to think, and a great deal of modern life…seems deliberately designed to discourage that."

The Denver prelate emphasized the importance of forming "a strong and genuinely Catholic conscience" and following that conscience when voting.

However, Catholics with such consciences are often intimidated for doing so. Chaput explained that was one of the reasons he wrote his book: "Frankly, I just got tired of hearing outsiders and insiders tell Catholics to keep quiet about our religious and moral views in the big public debates that involve all of us as a society. That's a kind of bullying. I don't think Catholics should accept it."

Catholic participation in politics concerns our obligation to "the pursuit of justice and the common good in the public square" and "is part of the history of salvation", the Denver bishop proclaimed. He indicated that few are exempt since "Tolerating grave evil within a society is itself a form of serious evil."

He expanded, "we have a duty to be politically engaged. Why? Because politics is the exercise of power, and the use of power always has moral content and human consequences." Chaput challenged, "if we claim to be 'Catholic,' we need to prove it by our behaviour. And serving other people by working for justice, charity and truth in our nation's political life is one of the very important ways we do that."

As for those who separate their faith from their political actions, the author of "Render Unto Caesar" called it a denial of Christ. "That kind of separation would require Christians to deny who we are; to repudiate Jesus."

The archbishop revealed that he was previously a long time Democrat who worked on political campaigns, including that of Jimmy Carter, but he no longer belongs to any political party. He warned, "The sooner Catholics feel at home in any political party, the sooner that party takes them for granted and then ignores their concerns." Many Christians have complained of this in recent decades.

Driving the point home forcefully Chaput added, "Party loyalty for the sake of habit, or family tradition, or ethnic or class interest is a form of tribalism. It's a lethal kind of moral laziness. Issues matter. Character matters. Acting on principle matters. But party loyalty for the sake of party loyalty is a dead end."

Pro-life, pro-family leaders have often been dismayed by their Christian leaders' lack of courage on the issues that matter. Chaput addressed this, again with his unusual frankness for a bishop: "modern life, including life in the Church, suffers from a phony unwillingness to offend that poses as prudence and good manners, but too often turns out to be cowardice."

Some of the Archbishops harshest words, yet still delivered in his calm, friendly speaking manner, were for those Catholics who supported the election of President Obama.

"A spirit of adulation bordering on servility already exists among some of the same Democratic-friendly Catholic writers, scholars, editors and activists who once accused prolifers of being too cozy with Republicans."

Chaput explained, "all political leaders draw their authority from God. We owe no leader any submission or cooperation in the pursuit of grave evil."

He continued that Catholics must witness to their faith and moral convictions, "without excuses or apologies" and that "in democracies, we elect public servants, not messiahs" as so many have referred to Obama.

Barack Obama was elected "to fix an economic crisis", Chaput stated, and not "to retool American culture on the issues of marriage and the family, sexuality, bioethics, religion in public life and abortion." He warned, however that this "could easily happen" and "will happen" - "but only if Catholics and other religious believers allow it."

The archbishop's frank admission of the Church's culpability for the current situation was likely something few in the audience had ever heard from a Catholic bishop. Chaput confessed, "The Church in the United States has done a poor job of forming the faith and conscience of Catholics for more than 40 years. And now we're harvesting the results -- in the public square, in our families and in the confusion of our personal lives."

On abortion, Archbishop Chaput, was as direct and blunt as any pro-life leader could dream to finally hear from a Catholic bishop. He insisted that for Catholics, abortion should be a litmus test. "One of the defining things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their respect for human life; and specifically their rejection of abortion and infanticide. We can't be Catholic and be evasive or indulgent about the killing of unborn life. We can't claim to be "Catholic" and "pro-choice" at the same time without owning the responsibility for where the choice leads - to a dead unborn child."

Addressing the recent increase in pro-life spokesmen stating that efforts to change laws are futile and we should instead attempt to lessen the numbers of abortions, Chaput stated, "We can't talk piously about programs to reduce the abortion body count without also working vigorously to change the laws that make the killing possible."

Chaput challenged the hypocrisy of Catholics calling themselves Catholic and then voting like pagans, He stated, "if we don't really believe in the humanity of the unborn child from the moment life begins, then we should stop lying to ourselves and others, and even to God, by claiming we're something we're not."

Although it was admitted that Catholics need to "do a much better job of helping women who face problem pregnancies", Chaput added the crucial perspective that, "we don't "help" anyone by allowing or funding an intimate, lethal act of violence. We can't build a just society with the blood of unborn children."

On the issue of hope, proclaimed incessantly by the Obama campaign, the archbishop taught that real hope "has nothing to do with the cheesy optimism of election campaigns. Hope assumes and demands a spine in believers" and "for a Christian -- hope sustains us when the real answer to the problems or hard choices in life is "no, we can't," instead of "yes, we can."

"The word "hope" on a campaign poster may give us a little thrill of righteousness," said the Denver Archbishop, "but the world will still be a wreck when the drug wears off. We can only attain hope through truth. And what that means is this: From the moment Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life," the most important political statement anyone can make is "Jesus Christ is Lord."

During the question and answer session following the lecture, a question was asked about the sometimes unmet responsibility of bishops to prevent pro-abortion speakers from addressing Catholic college functions.

Archbishop Chaput stated that bishops "welcome the input of the laity" and added, "If they disagree with us (bishops) it's really important that we hear that. We need your support, but we also need to hear your concerns if you think we make decisions that are contrary to the good of the Church." That was a surpringly refreshing response to some listeners who have experienced very different results from contacting their bishops on such matters.

In response to a question on the serious problems with the Catholicity of Catholic schools, Chaput emphasized the importance of "working on the principals and the people who manage the schools" as the best way to improve the Catholicity of the teachers.

On the abortion issue again, the archbishop said he was "astonished at the number of Catholics in my diocese who are pro-choice and who come to Mass every day." He repeated, "I am astonished."

In response to a question on ecumenical relations, he stated that Catholics now "have very little in common with the mainline protestant churches because we separate on the issues of life and marriage and embryonic stem cell research". Chaput noted that the Church has recently developed a deeper relationship with Evaneglicals "because we share a passion for the foundational issue of life and for the in some ways equally foundational issue of the meaning of marriage.

In response to a question about the possible excommunication of pro-choice Catholics, the archbishop was emphatic that he saw it as being completely ineffective and counterproductive. He stated it would be "percived as random use of his POWER to hurt people rather than to deal with issues of the truth." The archbishop further derided that use of a bishop's authority and concluded, " I don't think it works and that is why I don't do it. I don't think there are bishops who think it does work. We just don't go about that business these days."

The Time Has Come For Us to Take Action and Make a Change

This personal testimonial was first published here 2 years ago. It is being re-run today because the urgency for this movement is hitting a critical stage and recent visitors(priests included)have reported similar events. So many people are coming to Rome City, even in the dead of winter, saying they felt Our Lady told them to come NOW! As true believers, we cannot afford to wait any longer. You don't have to be a visionary with special gifts to understand the signs around you. Our Lady is making it very clear. Now is the time for action!

Our Lady of America is calling Her children...ALL of Her children...to Rome City during this moment of CHANGE. Not the kind of change cheered for by our President, but a change to purity in our lives as a reflection of our love and commitment to Her Son Jesus.

Please join us in this effort by making your own pilgrimage to pray in the Our Lady Mother of Mercy Chapel or sending your prayers and donations to help us preserve this holy place for Our Lady's work. Millions of souls are at stake in this world. Our Lady needs your help NOW! We must safeguard this special site as we keep our eye on the US Bishops enthroning Our Lady of America in the National Basilica in Washington, DC




During the first Pilgrimage at Sylvan Springs in Rome City, IN, held on July 14, 2006, and at the same chapel where Our Lady appeared for the first time to Sister Mary Ephrem as Our Lady of America, I had a personal vision and inner locution from Our Lady of America during the praying of a group rosary of 15 decades and also the Divine Mercy Chaplet.

I was sitting on the side of the chapel where what is thought to have been the Blessed Mother's alter originally, and now has standing there a life size statue of the Lady of Lourdes. It is thought to be in the same approximate location of where Sister Mary Ephrem first saw Our Lady of America appear to her.

I have for many years said the rosary and use the rosary as a way to guide me into contemplative prayer when praying it alone. It is not unusual for me to go into contemplative prayer very quickly while saying the rosary if I DO NOT concentrate specifically on the Mysteries and intentions during my prayer time. I have always found when this happens it is the will of God or Our Lady for me to be in silence as the prayers are being said somehow or other in my head and heart. It is hard to explain, unless one goes into contemplative prayer on a regular basis, of what this is like. It is almost like multi-tasking---you are consciously praying and yet you are in deep silence and nothingness with the all Powerful God, -- somewhat like St. John of the Cross explains while being in infused contemplation. I am praying the complete rosary while in deep prayer to our Lord and also simultaneously being very open to ONE with Our Lord in silence. Always the peace that is felt after this happens is the greatest gift from God and I am able to go about my day very peacefully no matter what the day brings after this prayer time. I always, after this happens, feel very at ONE with everything and everyone in the entire universe---including people, animals, insects, plant life, etc. I feel so at ONE with all and I know I am ONE with all that I know for that short time I am totally ONE with GOD! Other times in contemplative prayer I am praying with God and doing healings- spiritual and physical for people who have asked for my prayers for their difficulties. And than there are other times God actually calls me to come and pray as a contemplative and infuses the silence and ONENESS into me without even using the rosary. But it always happens to me in a quite, or prayerful, peaceful place that I am unknowingly led to whether in a church or at home having quiet time or outside with nature.

There is a reason I feel I must explain this to you so you know though I have been in a contemplative state many times, and have had so many wonderful experiences during and after those times of Oneness and visions and inner locutions and messages, and also successful healings for people from intercession with the saints and Our Lady; that on that evening of July 14Th, 2006, I have never had anything like that happen to me in the way it did at the chapel at Sylvan Springs.

Usually while saying the rosary or prayer in a group I do not go into infused or deep contemplative prayer as I mentioned above. I remain part of the group prayer. That evening I prayed with the group starting with the Joyful Mysteries and going on to the Sorrowful Mysteries and by the time we came to the middle or so of the second Sorrowful Mystery I no longer was physically active or mentally active with the group. I have no explanation of what really happened, because it felt as if I was being called into infused contemplative prayer but it was Definitely Different! I could hear the group mumbling in the background but not make out the words, and I could feel my self gazing up at the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes and felt myself move my lips while continuing to pray the rosary, without I believe audible sound, at my pace as if I were completely alone, but knew I wasn't. I had no real thought of what I would call it at the time of when it was happening to me but I knew it was different than anything I had ever experienced with visions, healings, and the total of oneness with the (absence of even being) as one feels in contemplative prayer.

I cannot tell you for sure how long I was in this state. I do know it had to be awhile because as I mentioned I left the group internally around the second Sorrowful Mystery and did not come back into the group until the 2nd or 3rd. decade of the Divine Mercy Chaplet. So I am guessing 15 to 20 minutes more or less, I really don't know. I was aware of continuing to pray the rosary over and over, but cannot remember if I was saying it in order or not. I just remember moving my lips to the Hail Mary, Our Father, and Glory Be. I never stopped praying even as the vision appeared. (But when the vision appeared I was completely alone with no one around that I was aware of. I don't know how long that was unfortunately in our time, but it seemed very short to me.) If I had to guess I would say the vision appeared soon after this leaving the group internally happened to me.


The vision was of Our Lady of America and she was slightly behind the life size real statue of Our Lady of Lourdes. She was to the statues left, but to my right as I gazed up at her, and I could see them both, with peripheral vision, I would guess, as I saw our Lady of Lourdes statue as I was seeing Our Lady of America's vision. And I do not doubt the only real vision was of Our Lady of America. The statue just appeared in my vision sight at the same time. I feel strongly---- because of that there is a connection between the two Blessed Mother's in someway but I have not yet been privy to it. (Maybe that is something someone else will pick up on.)


What made this vision more unusual was that I saw her crown with all the 7 points and even mentally counted them along with the colored jewels. The crown was so clear I could see every detail of the grain of what appeared to be metal, but I cannot be sure of the material. I saw the crown sitting on her head with what looked like a somewhat white veil off to both sides of the crown at a 45 degree angle and perhaps some hair, than her face. What is very unusual here is I did not see any detail in her face. I just saw the shape of her face and what appeared to be perhaps a veil and some hair and on down to what looked to be her neck and than the rest of the vision of the body was hazy and misty and seemed to diminish down from there to a mistiness. She was life size. The vision stayed exactly that way the whole time I gazed at her and prayed the rosary, and I have no idea how long she was there, but she never changed in appearance and I always had a peripheral view of the statue of Our lady of Lourdes next to her but more out in front; as I said Our Lady of America was a bit further back and to the side of the statue. (At least that is how her crowned appeared to be in comparison to the statue. She was one dimension and the color of the crown was a brilliant deep gold and the jewels were of blue, green, red, and yellow and her face and what appeared to be a veil and perhaps some of her hair appeared a very misty light gold in color, almost more as a reflection from the crown. The reason I feel I may have seen part of a veil is all around the deep brilliant gold of the crown and the misty gold color of her face and perhaps hair was some whiteness to each side of the face. Not pure white, but definitely a different than a light misty gold as her face. (I APOLOGIZE IF I AM REPEATING BUT I AM ACTUALLY SEEING IT IN MY MIND'S EYE AS I WRITE IT. (I don't think I will ever forget it!!! )


At some point I heard her say to me very, very clearly in a very pleading voice "Get me There."! I knew she was speaking directly to me, and I felt so helpless from the tone of the voice and words I heard. If I could add a word that was not said just to let you know how desperate the voice sounded I would add the word "Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaase Get Me There"!! I answered almost immediately, I believe, "How?"-- (also in a very desperate voice and feeling, as I remember moving my lips and what I was feeling as I said it whether audible or not.) -- I also said it a couple of more times in my mind to her---"How?", "How?" Unfortunately I never received an answer. But I could feel her concern and knew immediately she was speaking of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington D.C. I just knew it, I never thought to ask where?. Perhaps that is because it is where we all know she wants and needs to be; but if it were some place else I KNOW she would have told me. She was giving me a message and she would have wanted it to be clear even if short. Her plea was imminent to do it quickly, and she herself seemed to have her own concern of not getting there in time. (Actually for me, this was the first time I felt she might not make it in time. I have always felt the time was short but we would get her there in enough time.) That night I was not as sure!! It was very unsettling for me because of the request and the helplessness I felt. I felt as a child who was disappointing her mother!

Sometime very soon after that I was back with the group as I heard them saying the Divine Mercy Chaplet which I had not said with Our Lady during the vision. I then realized I had lost quite a bit of time and was very aware of everything around me, including a man snapping pictures and leaning to the side of me about a foot away from my face. I was later told he had been there for quite some time. He wanted to know what I was holding in my left hand as I was looking at the statue. I told him it It was the 1st. class relic of St. Padre' Pio and I just said that to him simply. I was a bit irritated that he was right on top of me and asking me questions during the chaplet.

After all of the praying and healing was over this girl came up to me and started to ask me questions as to what type of experience I had. I was quite surprised that she would have asked since she should have been praying and not paying attention to me. No one else but she and the photographer seemed to notice. To most people it was as if I was not there. At this time I had said nothing to anyone. She asked many questions regarding the relic I was letting people pray with and finally I asked her who she was. She than told me who she was and said she knew I had had some type of experience during the rosary because the man taking pictures of me for a long period told her he came to me because of the look on my face and that I had not blinked my eyes for at least 10 minutes if not longer and appeared to be in a daze. That is when I realized I first realized I had not been blinking and the only thing I had ever read about people not blinking and being so deeply almost hypnotic is during an experience of Ecstasy!. I am not saying that is what it was, but it was different than anything I have ever experienced in all my prayers and visions and it was as real as anything that has ever happened to me in my life! I know no one can go that long without blinking their eyes without severe eye damage unless they are in some sort of hypnotic state, if what he was telling me was the truth. I honestly cannot tell you if I were blinking my eyes, because for me it was as if my body was not even there though I know it was. This was definitely not an out of body experience!!!.

I will not draw conclusions as to what happened to me, as I am not one to want to bring attention to myself under these circumstances. I feel what happened to me was meant to happen, period! I feel what happened to me can happen to anyone if they are open to things like that at a particular time and are willing to go with the flow of what the Holy Spirit is probably very involved in and not use their free will to stop what is to happen. I do not feel as if I was to keep this information to myself, but I do feel it was only to be shared, at this time, until it is right, with a few people who might be able to help Our Lady in her plight to be brought with dignity and love into the Shrine!

What happens from here will be in the hands of Our Lady, God and the people who are open to the spirituality that is so desperately needed in our world, and can hopefully do something with this. If it includes me fine, if not that is fine too!! We all have a part in this life and are meant to do what we are meant to do. I just allowed the Holy Spirit to work through me that night as many of us do and should continue to do, and be able to perhaps share and get Our Lady a bit closer to Sister Mildred's goal and Our Lady's wish!

God Bless Us All and help us to Love All People, All life, and to become One with the Whole Universe which will make us One with God!!!

T.W., South Bend, IN

Florida House of Reps Calls For Criminal Charges Against Abortionists

The Florida House of Representatives has issued a letter to State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle calling for criminal charges to be filed against all involved in the death of a viable baby that was born alive at a Hialeah abortion clinic in 2007.

The baby, Shanice Denise Osbourne, was delivered by unlicensed abortion worker Belkis Gonzalez, who cut the baby's umbilical cord with a pair of office scissors, then, while she was moving and struggling to breathe, shoved her into a plastic bag and tossed her in the trash. Gonzalez later stashed the baby's body on the abortion clinic roof to hide it from authorities.

Abortionist Pierre Renelique did not show up for the scheduled abortion and arrived only after the baby had been delivered and killed. Last week, the Florida Medical Board revoked his medical license based on his negligence in this case. A civil suit was filed against those responsible for Shanice's death earlier this month.

The letter, dated February 17, 2009 and signed by at least 40 members of the Florida House of Representatives, says to Rundle, "The undersigned Members of the Florida Legislature from both sides of the debate on this issue strongly urge you to take appropriate action against the individuals involved in these morally reprehensible acts."

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman commented on the recent development in the case, saying, "We know every detail of how this living baby was killed and we know who did the killing. There's nothing left to investigate. It's time to bring those responsible for his heinous crime to justice."

The Obama adnministration nor Nancy Pelosi, both pro-abortion, have issued any comments in this clinic's defense.

North Dakota Has Life Right!!

By Kathleen Gilbert
BISMARCK, North Dakota, February 19, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

The rights of unborn children gained a victory in North Dakota on Tuesday, as the state House of Representatives voted to recognize the personhood of all human beings, from conception.

"For purposes of interpretation of the constitution and laws of North Dakota, it is the intent of the legislative assembly that an individual, a person, when the context indicates that a reference to an individual is intended, or a human being includes any organism with the genome of homo sapiens," reads part of The Personhood of Children Act (House Resolution 1572).

Led by American Life League Associate group North Dakota Life League, North Dakota's Personhood Movement celebrated the passage of the bill, introduced by State Rep. Dan Ruby, in a 51-41 vote. A grassroots personhood campaign had spurred the outcome, with thousands of calls asking legislators to support the bill in its unaltered form.

"We are very excited about the personhood movement in North Dakota - which has the chance to become the first state to protect the rights of all its citizens from their biological beginning," said Jim Sedlak, vice president of American Life League.

"North Dakotans have gotten used to cold temperatures like -44 degrees, but they haven't gotten used to child-killing," said Cal Zastrow, a North Dakotan who took part in the grassroots personhood campaign along with his family. "We applaud and support their efforts to protect every baby by love and by law."

Fifteen other states are currently pursuing personhood legislation.

The Senate vote is expected in the next two to three weeks. North Dakota will become the first state in the Union with personhood legislation if the measure passes the Senate.

On Monday the state House of Representatives also approved an informed consent law requiring any woman seeking an abortion to be informed that the procedure kills a "whole, separate, unique, living human being." HR 1445 passed in a 61-31 vote.

"The North Dakota House did the right thing by strengthening the informed consent law," stated Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life. "The state's last abortion mill will not, of course, be happy. Their business depends upon covering the truth, not conveying it."

Mexican State of Colima Amends Constitution to Protect Right to Life from Conception, 19-0

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
COLIMA, MEXICO, February 18, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

In an overwhelming 19-0 vote, legislators in the state of Colima, Mexico, decided Tuesday to amend the state's constitution to protect the right to life "from the moment of conception."

Article one of the state's constitution now reads: "Life is a right inherent in every human being. The State will protect and guarantee this right from the moment of conception. The family constitutes the fundamental base of society. The State will encourage its organization and development. For the same reason, the home, and particularly the children, will be the object of special protection on the part of the authorities. Every measure or disposition for protecting the family will be considered to relate to public order..."

The vote was held in response to an attempt by a socialist legislator from the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) (like Obama and Pelosi?) to legalize abortion on demand, following similar legislation passed in Mexico City in 2007. The legislature instead rejected the bill in a 17-1 vote last month, and has now acted to secure the rights of the unborn in the state from further assault.

The ultraliberal Proceso magazine openly attributed the victory to the influence of the Catholic Bishop of Colima (the capital of the state), Jose Luis Amezcua. The bishop organized a "march for life" in response to the legalization bill last month, and said that "the Congress needs to take to heart the approval of the constitutional reform to introduce into the document the idea that life begins from conception..."

However, the sponsors of the amendment denied that religion was the motivation behind the bill. "Medically it is established that the protection of the right to life should be awarded from the moment of the conception, and not as a dogma, but because medical science affirms that when the first chromosomic division occurs, immediately after ovular fertilization, the resulting genotype confers individuality on the new person," wrote the congressional committee that approved the measure.

Sponsors of the amendment included the Colima Governor Silverio Cavazos Ceballos (of the Institutional Revolutionary Party), a representative of the pro-Catholic National Action Party, and an independent legislator. The sponsor of the original bill to legalize abortion on demand, Adolfo Nunez Gonzales, abstained in the final vote.

Similar amendments have been passed recently in the states of Baja California, Sonora, and Morelos. However, the constitutionality of the Baja California amendment is now being contested in the nation's Supreme Court. If the Court rules negatively in the case, all similar amendments could be negated as well, making it impossible to defend the right to life at the state level.

The Time Has Come...to Excommunicate Nancy Pelosi. Biden next?

By Kathleen Gilbert
WASHINGTON, D.C, February 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

Reports have surfaced that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a self-avowed "Catholic" adamant abortion supporter, intends to head a delegation to Euope that will meet with Pope Benedict XVI.
Today the Drudge Report headlined a report by Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) on Houston's KSEV radio that Pelosi hopes to pass the federal economic stimulus bill in time for her join the group, which reportedly leaves Friday evening.
According to Il Tempo, Pelosi will arrive in Rome Sunday afternoon, her first visit to the city since becoming Speaker of the House. It has not been determined when Ms. Pelosi plans to meet the Pope.
Speaker Pelosi has drawn severe criticism from Catholic leaders for her misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine in light of her extreme pro-abortion position.
In a Meet the Press appearance last August, Pelosi justified her support for abortion despite professing Catholicism by saying that "the doctors of the Church haven't been able to make that definition" on whether life begins at conception.
"The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose," she continued. "This isn't about abortion on demand, it's about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and - to - that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god."
In September Pelosi's bishop, Archbishop Niederauer of San Francisco, invited her to discuss witih him the abortion issue. Pelosi stated she would "welcome the opportunity," but there is no report of Pelosi having yet scheduled a meeting with the archbishop.
Fr. Tom Euteneuer, president of Human Life International (HLI), told LifeSiteNews.com that HLI will be briefing the Vatican "so they are aware of her dismal record on life issues.
"It is our hope that the Holy Father will not grant the floundering Speaker of the House what she surely wants and expects, a quick and valuable photo-op, but will rather give her a stern lecture on contraception and abortion and let her know that her eternal salvation is in danger," said Fr. Euteneuer.
"Further, this would be the perfect opportunity to formally excommunicate the Speaker, as she has done everything a public official possibly can to declare her lack of communion with the Holy Father and the Roman Catholic Church on every conceivable issue."

Obama's Scheme To Steal a Pro-Life Vote in Senate Fails

by Steven ErteltLifeNews.com Editor

Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire has withdrawn his name from consideration for the Commerce Secretary post. The move is good news for pro-life advocates who worried about losing another pro-life vote in the Senate when every vote is needed to stop President Barack Obama's pro-abortion agenda.
Some pro-life advocates accused Obama of playing politics with the Gregg nomination because he knew it would remove a strong pro-life vote from the Senate.
Gregg said he would only accept the nomination if he could have an assurance that a Republican would be appointed by pro-abortion Democratic Gov. John Lynch to keep his seat with the GOP.
Lynch picked Republican Bonnie Newman to replace Gregg upon his confirmation, but Newman takes a pro-abortion position and would have cost the pro-life side another vote on key provisions.
Gregg said on Thursday that he couldn't continue on with the confirmation process for the Cabinet post because he disagrees too strongly with Obama's economic plans.
"It has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me," Gregg said about quitting the nomination process.
"Obviously the President requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives," he said.
As a result of his decision, ""I will continue to represent the people of New Hampshire in the United States Senate," Gregg said.
To illustrate the importance of Gregg's vote, the Senate voted last month in an attempt to reverse the decision Obama made to rescind the Mexico City Policy. Obama issued an executive order to restore taxpayer funding to groups that promote and perform abortions in other nations.
The Senate defeated the amendment to bring back the pro-life policy on a 60-37 vote, with Gregg voting in the pro-life minority. With Newman in place, abortion advocates would have been closer to a 2-1 advantage.

Obama Leads Black Politicians to Ignore Rate of Black Abortions in USA...OVER 1450 Black Babies Put To Death Each Day in USA

Commentary by Pastor Stephen E. Broden, Senior Pastor, Fair Park Bible Fellowship
DALLAS, TX, February 10, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

I was struck by the noticeable absence of black elected officials at the January 22nd March for Life in Washington DC. Not one leader from the black congressional caucus was present. This was especially curious to me in light of the fact that the rate of pre-natal murder among black babies is higher than any other group in America.
Statistics about the numbers of abortions in the black community are now commonly reported on in major media throughout the nation. We have all heard and read of staggering numbers of pre-natal murders performed by Planned Parenthood and other abortionists; these numbers are appalling and frightening to all decent minded men and women in our community.
Over 1,450 black babies are murdered in their mother's womb daily, and three out of every four black pregnancies end in what might be termed a "womb-lynching." These facts are frightening and indicate that black women and their babies are the target of the 1.8 billion dollar abortion industry in America. These statistics demonstrate that there is a holocaust of epic proportions happening in our community. Why haven't our black elected officials responded to this malady? Black Americans elect politicians/legislators to protect their interest. Our interest includes a wide range of social, political, educational, and health related needs. However, our children should be first on the list of those who most need our protection and certainly the protection of our political leaders. The practice of pre-natal murder is without question having a deleterious impact on the very existence of our community. It has been reported by population demographers that 2 to 2.5 children per household are required in order for a population to replace itself. The number of children being born in black households across America is less than 1 child per family. The black community is not replacing itself and no doubt pre-natal murder is a major contributing factor. The silence of the Black Congressional Caucus is unthinkable when the community they serve is at the door of extinction. Pre-natal murder is the 900-pound gorilla in the community. Its impact is far more devastating than AIDS, heart disease, diabetes, and drug abuse. Needless to say the combination of all of these pathologies will wipe us off the face of the American map if we don't do something about them now, starting with pre-natal murder. So, the absence of black elected officials at this extraordinary event, which was designed to bring national attention to a practice that is murdering countless numbers of babies annually, is more than just a curiosity, it's a down right rotten dirty shame! The community is starting to take notice of those who tacitly watch the destruction of our babies and our women. You who deliberately withhold power and influence to stop the insanity of pre-natal murder will be held accountable come Election Day!

Black Students for Life to Obama: “What About Equality for All?”

Commentary by Lawson Lipford-Cruz, President, Black Students for Life
WASHINGTON, February 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

This is Black History Month and the air is just beginning to settle on the fact that the United States of America finally has a black President.
The inauguration of the first African-American president fell in conjunction with Martin Luther King Day, and because of this, we were able to reflect upon the journey, the struggles and our achievements as Americans and most importantly as human beings.
It is truly difficult to fathom what must have been going through the minds of those from the Civil Rights era. They faced brutality and death and for a time it must have seemed that there was no light at the end of the tunnel in the quest for equality. Black people simply wanted to be known and treated as equals after being relegated to second class citizen status for literally hundreds of years.
Although I am a child of the eighties and nineties, and therefore removed from the horrific lynchings and battle to defeat Jim Crow laws, I still feel a sense of catharsis.
As a child, I remember when someone who looked like me was not even allowed to be the main character in a Hollywood movie (without being a stereotype). I remember white kids in the playground telling me that it was wrong for me to "like" a girl unless she was black, which would have posed a problem since there were very few black kids at the private Christian school I attended.
Sadly, I recall an ignorant peewee football coach called me a nigger during practice. I was only 11 years old!
The point is, we have all experienced racism and it is true that the election and swearing in of a black president seems to drop a hammer on those things that we have struggled against. I must reiterate, however, that it is cathartic in that sense, because there are still some big problems here. How do we not see history repeating itself?
Babies are the new second class citizens. We are still being lynched, but instead of being hung in a tree, we are lynched in the womb. How is it that a helpless baby can be brutally killed, then tossed aside so easily and without consequence?
I wish President Obama the best of luck, and I think he is an intelligent man with basically good intentions for our country, but what good are those intentions if he refuses to see value in all Americans? I still don't understand how he can call a baby a punishment. I don't see how he can live with himself, believing that a harmless baby who survives abortion should be ruthlessly killed anyway.
How is it that black people who lived through the long struggle for equality and experienced racism and violent hate crimes can now not want to fight this fight against the slaughter of the innocent? I strongly feel that status, size and the abilities of a human being are not proportional to the degree in which they are deemed important.
My hope is that President Barack Obama and all of our political leaders will fight for all human beings. I hope and pray that the underdog - in this case, small children - will someday soon have a chance at life.
I didn't cast my vote for our new president, I couldn't. Many of my friends didn't understand why - many were very angry with me. But I had to stand firm. I told them: I'm pro-life and I cannot be "cool" with a president who does not stand for the things that I stand for no matter what. Abortion is wrong - dead wrong!

Just How "Catholic" is the Catholic News Service?

By Ronald J. Rychlak, University of Mississippi School of Law

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), a bill proposed in the 110th U.S. Congress, declared that “it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.” If passed and signed into law, it would overturn virtually every legal restriction on abortion, including limits on partial-birth abortion and parental notification. While on the campaign trial, President Obama said: “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” In fact, he was one of 19 senators who co-sponsored the legislation.The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has strongly opposed the Freedom of Choice Act. In a statement entitled The Freedom of Choice Act: Most Radical Abortion Legislation in U.S. History, the USCCB’s Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities argued that FOCA would go “far beyond even Roe.” Among other things, “FOCA will bar laws protecting a right of conscientious objection to abortion.” In other words, Catholic hospitals could be forced to perform abortions.
Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki, chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance, said at the November bishops’ meeting that passage of FOCA “could mean discontinuing obstetrics in our hospitals, and we may need to consider taking the drastic step of closing our Catholic hospitals entirely…. I do not think I’m being alarmist in considering such drastic steps.”
Imagine, then, my surprise to open our diocesan newspaper only to read in a Catholic News Service story written by CNS reporter Nancy Frazier O’Brien: “no Catholic hospital in the United States is in danger of closing because of the Freedom of Choice Act…. [T]he Freedom of Choice Act died with the 110th Congress and, a week after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, has not been reintroduced.”
O’Brien referenced the Catholic Health Association’s president, Sister Carol Keehan, in order to explain that FOCA “poses no threat to Catholic hospitals or to the conscience rights of those who work there.” She went on to quote Bishop Robert N. Lynch of St. Petersburg, Fla., a member of the CHA’s board of trustees, saying: “there is no plan to shut down any hospital if [FOCA] passes.… There’s no sense of ominous danger threatening health care institutions.” O’Brien blamed concerns and “confusion over FOCA” on “misleading e-mails,” “false Internet rumors,” “blogs and Web sites,” and “anti-FOCA groups” on Facebook.
A close and very generous reading of the quotes in O’Brien’s article leaves some room for interpretation about what the people were saying. Sister Keehan seemed to be suggesting that Catholic hospitals could oppose the law in a passive way without compromising their ideals, the way people fought for civil rights in the 1960s. The same might arguably be said of Bishop Lynch, especially since quotations might be taken in different contexts. O’Brien, however, left herself no such wiggle room.
This piece is clearly intended to soften up Catholic opposition to FOCA and to the Obama administration. O’Brien tries to assure readers that FOCA poses no threat to Catholic sensibilities; there is no danger. She actually argues that the new administration has had a whole week, and it has not yet reintroduced the legislation. In fact, she explains, FOCA is dead.
The USCCB does not see things that way. It is currently conducting a postcard campaign to “Fight FOCA.” The related USCCB web page explains that “many pro-life laws and policies are subject to attack and reversal. The new Congress includes the largest number of pro-abortion members since 1993.” The bishops go on to explain that “63 pro-abortion groups have publicly submitted a comprehensive 55-page blueprint for their agenda to the incoming Administration. Passing FOCA is a priority….”
The author of a piece like O’Brien’s, of course, is primarily responsible for its content, but there are others. Those who were quoted in the article, if taken out of context, need to clarify their positions. The Catholic News Service decided to publish and distribute the article despite the clear position of the USCCB. Frankly, the article is so out of line with everything we know, even those diocesan newspapers that ran it should have known better.
Our bishops have taken a strong leadership position on FOCA. Other Catholic leaders and entities should follow their example. Unfortunately, the CNS article by Nancy Frazier O’Brien seeks to undercut them.

Vatican Official: Bishops Have no Choice But to Refuse Communion to Pro-Abort Politicians

By Hilary White
ROME, January 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com)

Archbishop Raymond Burke, in an exclusive interview last week, told LifeSiteNews.com that the issue of pro-abortion politicians continuing to receive Holy Communion is still one of major concern and that it is the duty of bishops to ensure that they are refused.
He told LifeSiteNews.com, "I don't understand the continual debate that goes on about it. There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion."
"The Church's law is very clear," said Archbishop Burke, who was appointed last year by Pope Benedict XVI as the head of the Church's highest court, the Apostolic Signatura. "The person who persists publicly in grave sin is to be denied Holy Communion, and it [Canon Law] doesn't say that the bishop shall decide this. It's an absolute."
Among the US bishops directly to address the issue, Archbishop Burke was one of around a dozen who vigorously supported a directive of the Vatican that said pro-abortion Catholic politicians "must be refused" Holy Communion if they attempt to receive at Mass. Others have refused to abide by the Vatican instruction and the Church's own Code of Canon Law, saying they would rather focus on "education" of such politicians.
Archbishop Burke called "nonsense" the accusation, regularly made by some bishops, that refusing Holy Communion "makes the Communion rail a [political] battle ground". In fact, he said, the precise opposite is true. The politician who insists on being seen receiving Holy Communion, despite his opposition to the Church's central teachings, is using that reception for political leverage.
In 2004, when self-proclaimed Catholic and candidate for the Democrat party, Sen. John Kerry, was frequently photographed receiving Holy Communion despite his vigorous support of abortion, the US Bishops Conference issued a document which said only that it is up to individual bishops whether to implement the Church's code of Canon Law and refuse Communion. The issue has remained prominent with the appointment of Joe Biden, another pro-abortion Catholic politician, as Vice President of the United States of America.
Archbishop Burke recalled previous experiences with Kerry, pointing to the several occasions when the senator was pictured in Time magazine receiving Communion from Papal representatives at various public events. Burke said that it is clear that Kerry was using his reception of Holy Communion to send a message.
"He wants to not only receive Holy Communion from a bishop but from the papal representative. I think that's what his point was. Get it in Time magazine, so people read it and say to themselves, 'He must be in good standing'."
"What are they doing? They're using the Eucharist as a political tool."
In refusing, far from politicising the Eucharist, the Church is returning the matter to its religious reality. The most important reasons to refuse, he said, are pastoral and religious in nature.
"The Holy Eucharist, the most sacred reality of our life in the Church, has to be protected against sacrilege. At the same time, individuals have to be protected for the sake of their own salvation from committing one of the gravest sins, namely to receive Holy Communion unworthily."
Archbishop Burke also dismissed the commonly proffered excuse that such politicians need more "education". Speaking from his own direct experience, he said that Catholic politicians who are informed by their pastors or bishops that their positions in support of pro-abortion legislation makes it impossible for them to receive Holy Communion, "I've always found that they don't come forward."
"When you talk to these people, they know," he said. "They know what they're doing is very wrong. They have to answer to God for that, but why through our pastoral negligence add on to that, that they have to answer to God for who knows how many unworthy receptions of Holy Communion?"
Archbishop Burke said that the issue had been debated enough. He rejected the idea that the matter should be left to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, saying the Conference has no authority in the matter. "This is a law of the universal Church and it should be applied."
"I think this argument too is being used by people who don't want to confront the issue, this whole 'wait 'til the Conference decides'...well the Conference has been discussing this since at least 2004. And nothing happens."
When asked what the solution was, he responded, "Individual bishops and priests simply have to do their duty. They have to confront politicians, Catholic politicians, who are sinning gravely and publicly in this regard. And that's their duty.
"And if they carry it out, not only can they not be reproached for that, but they should be praised for confronting this situation."

Star Trek Actor Who Paid for Three Abortions Now Condemns Woman's "Right to Choose...to Kill Her Baby"

By Kathleen Gilbert
LOS ANGELES, February 2, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com)

Actor Gary Graham knew that by writing about his personal experience and rejection of abortion, he would be incurring the ire of not a few among the Hollywood elite.

Yet a blog column posted last Tuesday by the seasoned actor, known most recently for his roles as Ambassador Soval in the TV series "Star Trek: Enterprise" and Capt. Ingles on "J.A.G.", took an unflinching look at truths almost entirely ignored by those in the Hollywood establishment.

"I’m going to say what millions know in the front of their brains, and many, many more millions know in the depths of their hearts … but won’t allow themselves to think it, much less feel it," wrote Graham. "And believe me, I know I’ll be hated for saying it, I’ll be hated by people who don’t know me, have never worked with me, have never golfed with me, had a drink with me.
"I’m going to say it anyway: Abortion is murder."

Graham described the irresponsibility of his youth that made abortion the convenient option for a drug-fueled, “free-love” lifestyle. He confessed to having paid for multiple abortions for girlfriends, observing that abortion “sure took the pressure off of me, a guy, interested in sex who had been raised in the era of, ‘Hey, you get a girl pregnant, you marry her!’” But then, he says, a "spiritual awakening" brought him to a "tearful epiphany of what it meant for a man to be with a woman, what sex was really designed for by our Creator and … what abortion is.

"I truly wish that I had had this conviction way back when…when I was only concerned about my selfish convenience of the day," wrote Graham. "But I didn’t want to know, I didn’t want to think about it. It was inconvenient to think about it."

He noted that the widespread acceptance of abortion "says volumes of how our entire culture has been coarsened," and "How life itself has been cheapened.”

"We are told to have sex any time we feel the urge. Condoms are handed out in grade schools. Promiscuity is not only condoned, it’s tacitly encouraged ... But if you should get pregnant and it’s just not a ‘convenient’ time for you, don’t worry, there are Family Planning Services. ... That inconvenient fetus can be surgically ripped from its uterine moorings, ground up and tossed into the trash like so much garbage.

"Problem solved, and the mother can resume her egocentric lifestyle. But the scars on that woman’s soul will never quite heal. I’m a man, but I’ve got them on mine."

Responding to those who call for abortion to be "legal but rare," Graham asked, "Why rare?
"What’s wrong with abortion, that you think it should be a rare occurrence? I’ve had moles removed from my skin. Doctors don’t tell us that a mole removal should be rare. So what’s with this ‘rare’ business? Or is it a tacit agreement that abortion … is plain wrong?

"Try this exercise: Every time you hear someone use the phrase '…a woman’s right to choose…' mentally complete the phrase with the following words – '…to kill her baby.' That’s what the argument’s about. A woman’s right to kill her baby."

Pro-Life People Must Not Lose Heart with Obama Election Says Vatican Archbishop

Says the movement must never stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade

By Hilary White - Rome Correspondent

VATICAN CITY, January 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) –
In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews.com earlier this week, Archbishop Raymond Burke sent a message of support from Rome to those in the U.S. who defend human life and the traditional family, telling them not to give up the fight, even though things may seem dire with the election of Barack Obama. The Archbishop particularly urged pro-life people to continue the political and legal battle against the 1973 US Supreme Court decision, Roe vs. Wade, that legalised abortion.

“We are in a very dark period for the pro-life movement, which means that now we have really to re-double all of our efforts,” he said.

The new president, Archbishop Burke said, must hear from the American people “who I believe are, in the end, pro-life, above all else.” But the time has come, with the election of the man who is being called by pro-life advocates the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, to announce clearly and firmly the message of the sanctity of life and family more than at any other time.

“There can never be any let-up on the effort to overturn Roe versus Wade,” he said, “because there is, at its deepest core, our most unjust judicial decision. It has to be overturned.”
He agreed that people of good will could work with the Obama administration to provide improved services to women in crisis pregnancies and pointed out that the Catholic Church has “above all, been in the forefront of that.” But, he said, “that can never exempt us from the duty” to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Despite the difficulties ahead, he urged the pro-life people to be the “tough who get going when the going gets tough.”

“It’s going to depend upon the pro-life movement to make that voice heard, and to get people to express to the president their dismay with what he’s doing, so that he understands that the people of the United States are not for the murder of infants in the womb.”

LifeSiteNews.com spoke to Archbishop Burke, who is regarded as a hero by many in the pro-life and family movement, at his offices in Rome, where he was recently appointed by Pope Benedict XVI as head of the Catholic Church’s highest tribunal, the Apostolic Signatura. The office of Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura is normally regarded as a “red hat” position that brings with it appointment as a Cardinal. It is widely expected among Vatican watchers that Pope Benedict will name Archbishop Burke a Cardinal at the next consistory.

He told LifeSiteNews.com that he is becoming “very concerned” at the number of people who have written to him to say that the election of Obama is a sign that the pro-life movement has definitively failed to overturn Roe vs. Wade. He particularly denounced the idea, put forward by some in the pro-life movement in the US, that the time has come to abandon the fight against Roe and turn exclusively to “education” and to cooperate with the new administration in “reducing abortions” by improving welfare and health services for women.

Archbishop Burke responded, saying, “To me this is a form of self-deception because the law itself is one of the principle teachers in any culture, and you have a law, a decision of the Supreme Court of your country, which says, in effect, that an infant in the womb can be destroyed right up to the time of birth and even in the act of birth.”

Until Roe vs. Wade is overturned, he said, “that law remains a teacher in the culture” and “represents a direction given to the life of the society, of the nation.

“So I’m very concerned that some of the dedicated pro-life people don’t fall prey to this false reasoning, and then not continue their work for the repeal of this Supreme Court decision.”
Archbishop Burke is known in the US as one of the most outspoken members of the US hierarchy on the Church’s teachings on the sanctity of life. He was the first among a very small number of US Bishops who enforced can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law, saying that pro-abortion Catholic politicians are not to be given Holy Communion. His position was confirmed by a letter of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in June of 2004.Upon the announcement of his transfer to Rome, Judie Brown, the president of the American Life League, said, “Archbishop Burke's contributions to the Church go beyond anybody's imagination. He is among the most courageous bishops that I have known in my entire life.”

The archbishop said, “I have been for years very much in the heart of the pro-life movement as I believe that I should be as a bishop.”

“It was painful for me to leave the United States because of my strong conviction about the importance of strong leadership, a prophetic leadership on the part of the bishops in the whole work of promoting the respect for human life.”

He particularly urged pro-life and family people to be on guard against becoming discouraged. “Discouragement is itself a prime temptation that Satan uses to get people to stop working for the good,” he said. “But the minute you give into discouragement he can get you to do whatever he wants. But if we are people of life, if we are people who honour the dignity of every human life, then we also are necessarily people of hope.

“I understand, from a human point of view, why people are discouraged and why they want to give up or try some radically different approach, but as people of hope we don’t have any choice in this matter. We have to continue the battle.”

The Best Super Bowl Ad Yet

NBC won't show it. They say NBC and NFL aren't interested in "political advocacy or issues."

Does that mean they don't want to support the United Way anymore?

Click Here to watch the ad:

http://www.catholicvote.com/

Leading Vatican Prelate Says Document of US Bishops Partly to Blame for Election of “Most Pro-Abortion President”

Also says Bishops’ Catholic News Service needs to be given "some new direction"

By Hilary White, Rome Correspondent ROME, January 28, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com)

A document of the US Catholic Bishops is partly to blame for the abandonment of pro-life teachings by voting Catholics and the election of the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, one of the Vatican’s highest officials said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com.

Archbishop Raymond Burke, the prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, named a document on the election produced by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops that he said “led to confusion” among the faithful and led ultimately to massive support among Catholics for Barack Obama.

The US bishops’ document, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” stated that, under certain circumstances, a Catholic could in good conscience vote for a candidate who supports abortion because of "other grave reasons," as long as they do not intend to support that pro-abortion position.

Archbishop Burke, the former Archbishop of St. Louis Mo. and recently appointed head of the highest ecclesiastical court in the Catholic Church, told LifeSiteNews.com that although “there were a greater number of bishops who spoke up very clearly and firmly ... there was also a number who did not.”

But most damaging, he said, was the document “Faithful Citizenship” that “led to confusion” among the voting Catholic population.

“While it stated that the issue of life was the first and most important issue, it went on in some specific areas to say ‘but there are other issues’ that are of comparable importance without making necessary distinctions.” Archbishop Burke, citing an article by a priest and ethics expert of St. Louis archdiocese, Msgr. Kevin McMahon, who analysed how the bishops’ document actually contributed to the election of Obama, called its proposal “a kind of false thinking, that says, ‘there’s the evil of taking an innocent and defenceless human life but there are other evils and they’re worthy of equal consideration.’

“But they’re not. The economic situation, or opposition to the war in Iraq, or whatever it may be, those things don’t rise to the same level as something that is always and everywhere evil, namely the killing of innocent and defenceless human life.”

Archbishop Burke also cited the work of the official news service of the US Catholic Bishops’ Conference, that many pro-life observers complained soft-pedalled the newly elected president’s opposition to traditional morality.

“The bishops need to look also at our Catholic News Service, CNS, they need to review their coverage of the whole thing and give some new direction, in my judgement,” he said.

The Politics of Dancing

Turn up the music. Obama and Pelosi are dancing around the abortion issue!


The Obama White House on Monday backed away from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s support for increased federal funding of contraception in the $825-billion stimulus bill now under consideration by Congress.

That was not President Obama’s idea, a White House spokesman told CNSNews.com.

“The principles of what he thought should be in the package--that wasn’t part of that,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton told CNSNews.com. “They’re working on what the final bill should look like.”

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) was among the first to criticize the Democratic plan, specifically the provisions funding contraception.

The provision in the draft legislation would expand federal funding for contraception through Medicaid, allowing those not poor enough to be currently eligible for Medicaid to nonetheless qualify for the contraception aid.

A program created during the Clinton administration allows states to seek a waiver to offer Medicaid “family planning” services to those who are otherwise not qualified for Medicaid. When states get a waiver, the federal government matches state Medicaid family planning funds with $9 in federal money for every $1 the state spends.

Under the provision in the stimulus package supported by Speaker Pelosi, states would no longer need to apply for a waiver. All 50 states would be given 9-1 federal matching funds for their Medicaid-funded contraceptives.

Pelosi defended the funding during an interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

“We also heard from Congressman Boehner coming out of the meeting today that again a lot of that spending doesn’t even meet the same test you just talked about right now,” Stephanopoulos said. “Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?”

“Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost,” Pelosi responded. “The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those--one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”

“So no apologies for that?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“No apologies. No,” the speaker responded. “We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy. Food stamps, unemployment insurance, some of the initiatives you just mentioned. What the economists have told us from right to left. There is more bang for the buck, a term they use, by investing in food stamps and in unemployment insurance than in any tax cut.”

Obama will be meeting with House and Senate Republican leaders on Capitol Hill Tuesday at noon, in what White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said is a serious attempt to get ideas from the opposing party.

Obama has consistently said he wants his stimulus bill to pass with bi-partisan support. However, many Republicans--including his rival in the presidential race, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said they would vote against the bill in its current form.

Vatican Official Calls Obama "Arrogant"

A senior Vatican official on Saturday attacked US President Barack Obama for "arrogance" for overturning a ban on state funding for family-planning groups that carry out or facilitate abortions overseas.

It is "the arrogance of someone who believes they are right, in signing a decree which will open the door to abortion and thus to the destruction of human life," Archbishop Rino Fisichella was quoted as saying by the Corriere della Sera daily.

Fisichella is president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, one of a number of so-called pontifical academies which are formed by or under the direction of the Holy See.

"What is important is to know how to listen... without locking oneself into ideological visions with the arrogance of a person who, having the power, thinks they can decide on life and death," he added.

Obama signed the executive order cancelling the eight-year-old restrictions on Friday, the third full day of his presidency.

The so-called "global gag rule" cut off US funding to overseas family planning clinics which provide any abortion services whatsoever, from the operation itself to counselling, referrals or post-abortion services.

"If this is one of the first acts of President Obama, with all due respect, it seems to me that the path towards disappointment will have been very short," Fisichella said.

"I do not believe that those who voted for him took into consideration ethical themes, which were astutely left aside during the election debate. The majority of the American population does not take the same position as the president and his team," he added.

The order won Obama praise from Democratic lawmakers, family planning and women's rights groups but drew angry condemnation from pro-life organisations and Republicans.

More than 250 health and human rights organisations from around the world sent Obama a letter, thanking him for ending a policy "which has contributed to the deaths and injuries of countless women and girls."

A Letter From Fr. Tom Euteneuer

Dear Friends of Life,

The pro-life movement is going through a great deal of self-examination at this time. I am not a pessimist, but my sense of realism tells me that the election of extreme abortion advocate, Barack Obama, and the nearly 7,000 political appointments of his administration will usher in a new decade of war on decency and the sanctity of life. Despite the ferocious optimism of his inauguration, the dark clouds of the culture of death are gathering over Washington as we speak, ready to cast their darkness everywhere.

In this time of preparation for the upcoming total war on life, I offer this modest list of Dos and Don'ts for the generous and valiant pro-lifers who gather for the March for Life in Washington, DC on January 22nd. May all men and women of good will take these recommendations to heart for a fruitful pro-life 2009!
DON'TS
1. Above all, do not grow despondent: there is much to fear for the situation of life around the world, but we are not permitted by our Christian faith to give up our efforts or zeal for life. In fact, we need to redouble it!

2. Do not become absorbed in the quest for a political solution to abortion: after 36 years of working for a political solution to abortion, we may soon see the wiping out of most, if not all, of the pro-life movement's gains with the stroke of a pen. Politics has failed. Or rather, we have failed at politics. Either way, politics now offers us little chance of anything other than just trying to slow the massive momentum of the culture of death.

3. Do not waste any more energy on overturning Roe: two Supreme Court seats are assured during an Obama administration, and they will undoubtedly be filled with extreme pro-abortion activist judges. A third appointment will leave us with no hope of overturning Roe in anyone's lifetime reading this. For that matter, the chance that a good pro-life President will succeed Obama in four years and nullify the leftward lurch of the high court is, shall we say, unlikely. Let's get hopes of undoing Roe out of our system and focus on more productive things.

DOS
1. Pray every day for God to end abortion with our help (in that order): abortion is such a great spiritual and social evil that only the divine power of God Himself can end it. "The Lord hears the cry of the poor," but God will not do it alone. He needs us to humbly recognize the basic fact that it is humanly impossible to end this evil. We need to get on our knees and beg His Mercy on the unborn and the conversion of all those who commit these evils.

2. Commit to fasting every week to end the evils of abortion and contraception: "Some demons can only be driven out by prayer and fasting," said the Lord, and we have to take that admonition seriously if we are to effect any change in the hearts of our people or of our society. Fasting makes us more spiritual and gives greater efficacy to all our works and prayers.

3. Take back the culture: Even if the anti-lifers hold the reins of political power, we must not sit back and allow moral anarchists to define all the terms of the cultural or social agenda. Whether it is through social activism for life (crisis pregnancy centers, pickets and prayer marches) or through touching hearts and minds one soul at a time (persuasion, formation, teaching, media), we cannot be neutral about the direction our American culture is heading. It is leading us to certain spiritual death, and no one can afford that. We need to fight for it and never give up the battle.
I promise you that Human Life International will be in the struggle for lives and souls continuously. It is our calling and mission. We will never give one inch to uphold the truth that the whole world needs to hear more than ever: namely, that human life is sacred from the first moment of natural fertilization to the moment of natural death - and we will defend it whether Obama likes it or not.Sincerely Yours in Christ,

Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, President, Human Life International