The Paper It's Written On

I wonder whether it has occured to Bart Stupak and his group of pro-life democrats that in the hours after the announcement of the deal they've brokered with the White House, there is a deafening silence from the left, and especially from the abortionist left (if one need distinguish).  Granted, it has only been a few hours.  NARAL's website makes no mention.  The online stories carried by the MSM make no mention.  Nobody is mentioning the reaction of the abortionists.

I suspect that's because there isn't any.

They know what Bart Stupak and his (I believe sincere) colleagues have allowed themselves not to know.  The abortionists know that the vaunted executive order to clarify how a health-care plan that expressly covers abortion does not in fact do so, if it is ever actually issued, will not be worth the paper it is written on.  With the television cameras off, and they will be off, the President will never get around to it; and the calls from Stupak and his group that he do so will not be heard outside of Congress, or perhaps outside of congressmen's offices, perhaps.  And if the order is actually, in some imaginary world, issued, it can as easily be rescinded.

If any of the above were false - if an executive order carried more weight than legislation, rather than less - the abortionists wouldn't have fought so tenaciously to keep it out of the law, and they wouldn't be so taciturn about the whole thing suddenly.  But wait, I do hear noises, after all: the sound of snickering in sleaves.
I am trying hard not to judge Stupak and his group.  The amount of pressure that they have been receiving has been enormous.  I think it safe to say that the spiritual combat is not yet over.

St. Patrick and the Snakes

I am rather inclined by nature to prefer natural explanations to supernatural ones, when it comes to understanding natural events or, for that matter, when it comes to analyzing claims of supernatural phenomena. I also understand the difficulties in interpreting historical accounts written by people more or less willing than myself to believe reports they have heard of the supernatural.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe in miracles as a possibility - and not just the "sunshine is a miracle" sort, either. I have made four pilgrimages to Lourdes and while there, I witnessed what seems to me to be the supernatural healing of a paraplegic. I also have had a couple near brushes with death that have given me great confidence in my guardian angel, whose existence I do not take to be figurative, but very, very real. Realer than my own.

All of this is said by way of disclaimer, because I want also to say that I think the account of St. Patrick driving the snakes from Ireland is probably at least somewhat allegorical rather than purely factual in nature.
The Ireland of Patrick's day, the Ireland that enslaved him and the Ireland that the missionary bishop evangelized, was not a nice place. Britain being the edge of Roman civilization, Hibernia (as they called Ireland) was the beginning of the shadows. Beyond that was the dark and brooding North Atlantic, which no man had sailed. The island did not have a government and laws, but had warlords and power. It did not have manorial estates or great cities like those found in the Roman world, but id did have slaves like the Romans had. It did not have elegant priests with elaborate cults to various gods gathered from around the world by explorers and soldiers; no, it had gods of its own, and fearsome priests who conducted deadly and secret rituals. Those fearsome priests fed their fearsome gods with the fearful blood of human victims.

I believe that the snakes in this allegory about St. Patrick represent the evil demons hidden behind the masks provided by the names of those Celtic gods. Wherever those dark gods have been worshiped - Hibernia, Mesoamerica, Phoenicia, and beyond - they have demanded blood, and they have shared a remarkable interest in the blood of virgins and children. The most virginal of virgins (except for the Virgin) and childish of children is, of course, a little baby. No blemish nor spot, on the skin or in the heart - the perfect sacrifice for demons that hate God, that hate goodness, that hate innocence and purity, that hate. I believe they hate babies for this reason, and I believe that they are trying to prevent the final return of Jesus Christ, whom they believe will return as he came the first time: a little child.

St. Patrick, who prayed and fasted, who was unsuccessfully poisoned and burned, who loved his enemies, drove the demons out of Hibernia. I bet the people, living long under those dark shadows, were immediately interested in self-sacrificial love as a, shall we say "viable," alternative to the scheming sacrifice of others that was taught by their own priests. When they saw that immense love in his own person, they were hooked. What is known is that within a few years of his arrival, many average folks and several chieftains in Hibernia had been converted by the ex-slave with the shamrock. He provoked fierce opposition from entrenched religious and political interests in doing so, but by the time he passed to eternal reward, St. Patrick seems to have converted almost the whole darned place. In any event, Hibernia was well on its way to becoming Ireland. Ireland is not the First Daughter of the Church (that is France), nor the Finest Flower of Catholic Culture (I am going to award that title to Italy), nor the Most Ardent Defender of the Faith (let's say Spain, which conquered the Moors). But I will say that Ireland, her recent religious malaise aside, is perhaps of all rocky and cracked places, the country with the most tenacious faith.

St. Patrick did that.

Think of our country. We have immense potential and tremendous accomplishments. We unfortunately have a recent fascination with solving our problems by killing them. Even our littlest little "problems" get killed without quarter or mercy by our modern, scientific, medical and judicial priesthoods. Our country is, I believe, in the feverish and menacing grip of very wicked spirits. They pervert our leaders, enchant our spokespeople, drowse our people, mutilate our laws, and are eroding our nation in so many ways.
St. Patrick might very well be a powerful intercessor for us.  Think on that over your drinks tonight.

St. Patrick, please drive away the snakes from our nation. Amen.

Archbishop Chaput Weighs In...

Archbishop Chaput of Denver wrote a column in his diocesan newspaper yesterday clarifying the position of the U.S. Bishops with respect to the current Obamacare baby-killing governmental power grab:


The Church in America opposes it, unambiguously and for several reasons.  Read all about it.

I Think He Means It

Bart Stupak (D-MI) has been saying all along that he and his ten pro-Democrat colleagues will not collaborate with the expansion of Federal funding for abortion. Nor will they vote for any bill that draws Americans into further material collaboration with that monstrous evil.



Coincidentally, Bart Stupak is a former state trooper, and he kinda looks like it, doesn't he? I mention that, because even though he has also practiced law, state troopers don't strike me as the sorta cats that are given to b.s. and clowning around. You hear him talk, and that kinda comes through. When he says that he and his little caucus aren't going to let abortion expand on their watch, I think he means it.

Keep praying, Christians.

Over THIS?

Pro-Abortion America (NOW, NARAL, etc.) have fought like a bunch of linebackers to keep Tim Tebow's extremist advertisements off the air. Check 'em out; but brace yourself, they'll make even the most resolute pro-lifer grimace.

Lol. Now that you've watched the entirely innocuous ads with Tim Tebow and his mom, are you as perplexed as I am about why the abortionists would try to keep these off the air? Their whoopin' and hollerin' has caused more of a fuss than these ads could ever have done by themselves. It's awesome, really. Normally, we traditionally-minded Christians are the ones who drive up the ratings of our enemy's propaganda. We get all worked up about a nasty movie or play and make all sorts of otherwise unaware bystanders suddenly become very interested. This time, the shoe is on the other foot.

Now, of course the ads aren't exactly innocuous. In fact, even though they say so little, they are deadly poison to the abortion industry. The have two attractive people, who clearly love each other immensely, and one of whom is famous - now even outside of his professional reputation. (In fact, opposition to the ad has probably turned Tim Tebow, at least for now, into a household name.) So why are these ads poison to those people? Because the ads undermine the mentality that makes abortion possible. For decades and decades, America has slowly been buying the lie that most of us know from our own experience isn't true: babies are a burden and it's better not to have them if there's a real chance that its not gonna work out just right. These advertisements remind us of what we all know: not only that nothing in life is guaranteed, but that somehow, with a bit of grit, optimism, friendship, and faith - heck, with just a little of any of hose things - life has a way of turning out OK, unless by OK we mean two kids and a dog and a white picket fence and two nice cars with annual vacations overseas. In that case, our odds narrow somewhat. But if we can roll with the punches just a little, we don't typically have to resort to murder to get things to work out passably. Sometimes, oftentimes, if we have eyes to see, things will turn out far better than we could have planned (not dreamed, but planned) ourselves anyway.

Actually, scratch my metaphor about poison. These ads are ingenious little bits of warm sunlight casting in among fungus that had been hidden in shadows. Just like fungus avoids sunlight, the abortionists avoid truth:

Life is worth living.

The Truth Hurts

“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” We’ve all heard the refrain, and we all know deep down inside that it’s false. Words have an incredible power in our lives. They have the ability to change us for the better or the worse. When you think of the positive impact of words, you might think of Lincoln at Gettysburg, Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech, or Neil Armstrong as he descended to the surface of the moon. These words fill us with pride or spur is on to good actions. Words can also move us to profoundly evil emotions and actions. The genocide in Rwanda which killed up to 1,000,000 people was in part brought about by government propaganda that repeatedly accused the oppressed Tutsis of being roaches, of subhuman dignity. Because words are so important and powerful, telling the truth is as equally important and powerful an action. Today’s readings highlight the importance and necessity of proclaiming the truth.

In the first reading we encounter the prophet Jeremiah, who is one of the more colorful Old Testament figures. God choses him to be a prophet, to proclaim the truth to Israel. Jeremiah wants none of it. He knows he’ll be persecuted for it, and he’s not up to the task. Basically, he’s like any one of us: “God, don’t choose me, I can’t do; I’m not the one for the job.” But in a very powerful passage, Jeremiah recounts, “The Lord put forth his hand and touched my mouth; and the Lord said to me, ‘behold I have put my words in your mouth.’” From then on, no matter how much Jeremiah wants to keep silent and not speak the truth, he’s almost forced to do so. At one point Jeremiah complains, “The Word of the Lord has brought me nothing but shame, criticism, and ridicule. If I say, ‘I will not mention him or speak anymore in his name, there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot.’” The prophet Jeremiah, regardless of consequences, was compelled to speak the truth.

In today’s Gospel, Jesus is in the same boat. He comes to his hometown of Nazareth, where he preaches in the synagogue, The Gospel tells us, “all spoke highly of him and all were amazed at the gracious words that came from his mouth.” But Christ knew that the people’s hearts weren’t in the right place. They were looking for signs and wonders, but didn’t want to go through the hard and necessary process of repentance. So Jesus reads their hearts—he’s God, so he can do that—and tells them the truth. Now imagine how much that must have hurt him, on a human level, to do so. He had been enjoying nothing but fame and adoration up to that point. In addition, these were the people he grew up with and knew intimately. These supposed friends and neighbors go from speaking highly of him to trying to kill him in a paroxysm of fury. Jesus, like Jeremiah, is driven to tell the truth, no matter what the personal consequences. Telling the truth has huge implications.

At our baptism, each of us was baptized into Christ. That means we take on Christ’s role (and Jeremiah’s, who prefigured Christ) of prophet. That doesn’t mean we go around reading palms or telling people that the world’s going to end in 2012. No, in the biblical sense a prophet is simply one who preaches the truth, consequences be as they may. We are witnessing a great example of someone living out his baptismal call to be a prophet with the great college quarterback, Tim Tebow. During the Super Bowl next Sunday, he will appear in a commercial that defends the sacredness and dignity of life from the moment of conception. The commercial, because it implicitly shows the evil nature of abortion, is being protested by many groups. Tim Tebow is in a real sense, a prophet; one who can say with Jeremiah, “there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot.” If God lives in us through grace, my brothers and sisters, shouldn’t he also speak through us?

Parents have a unique and privileged role in standing up for truth. The Church teaches that parents, and not teachers or other authorities, are the primary educators of their children. It falls squarely on the shoulders of moms and dads to pass along the truths of the faith and important values to their children in the midst of a very confusing culture. This is no easy task in our society, but it is nonetheless necessary. Parents, you have a special advantage in educating your children, though, precisely because you love them more than anyone else.

It is this all-important love that St. Paul extols in the second reading. St. Paul was no shrinking violet when it came to proclaiming the truth. He wrote, “Woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel!” But he also realized that preaching the truth was fruitless without love. In today’s second reading he says, “If I speak in human and angelic tongues, but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy, but do not have love, I am nothing.” The mistake that we make so often is teaching, admonishing, or correcting without love. A person is converted, or comes to the truth, not through our brilliant arguments or flawless reasoning, but through the love that accompanies our profession of the faith. Jesus says, “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

All of us have areas of our life where we don’t live the truth fully. We should examine our relationships with our spouse, our parents, or our friends to see where lies, sometimes so hidden but dangerous, are rooted. It would also be beneficial to examine how well we have lived our baptismal calling to be prophets-to stand up for the truth, regardless of the consequences. So often, I think we will find, we are more than comfortable just going with the flow. But, my brothers and sisters, Christ is constantly calling us to more. He calls us to live in the splendor of his truth and in the deep impenetrable bond of his love. Christ said to his disciples and he says to us, “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

The Roar of the Unborn Babies

On Friday, January 22, over 200,000 people showed up to participate in the annual March for Life, the largest annual demonstration in the nation's capital.

As usual, the Democratic Administration and Congress turned a completely blind eye, as if the couldn't see the crazy traffic patterns and endless streams of people.  I mean, it was a small group on the edge of the city, out of sight.  So it's not surprising that the Prez couldn't see them.

Oh, wait.  I forgot.  It was 200,000 people who marched, and they marched down the central street of the nation's capital - Constitution Avenue.  And they did it in broad daylight.

But they were kooky nuts, the kind you just have to ignore.  You know: lots of taxpaying, middle-class, family-values types.  And so monotonously homogenous.  I mean, groups like Presbyterians for Life, Lesbians for Life, Democrats for Life, Jews for Life... not to mention women who have had abortions... no diversity there.  Just lots of white, mean, conservative Catholic men.  No news here, people.  Move along.  Lol.

Well, for decades Congress, the Courts, and Democratic Administrations have ignored the personhood of unborn children, democratic process, the growing consensus of the American people, and even basic principles of morality and constitutional law.  Now, Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) has admitted that the Senate's version of healthcare "reform" cannot pass in the House, and Rep. Pence (R-In.) has attributed it to the bill's abortion language.  Though the Democratic Party has ignored an increasing amount of its own constituency and all manner of other voices and concerns, the little babies have them now, right where they want them.  The Democratic Party leadership is like the monkey with its hand caught in the cookie jar - they can't get their precious healthcare obamination because they won't stop clutching onto their government-funded abortions.

In a surprise twist of fate, the little children have saved from economic catastrophe an America that cannot bring itself to save them because of our love of economic comfort.

Let's pray that we learn to return the favor.

Babies and Distributism

Here's a little taste of G. K. Chesterton, whose writing style is somewhat ironic because as he writes, the reader has the constant sensation that he is being led somewhere and only the author knows.  He is a master of paradoxical conclusions designed to blow his ideological opponents out of the water.

I hope it is not a secret arrogance to say that I do not think I am exceptionally arrogant; or if I were, my religion would prevent me from being proud of my pride. Nevertheless, for those of such a philosophy, there is a very terrible temptation to intellectual pride, in the welter of wordy and worthless philosophies that surround us today. Yet there are not many things that move me to anything like a personal contempt. I do not feel any contempt for an atheist, who is often a man limited and constrained by his own logic to a very sad simplification. I do not feel any contempt for a Bolshevist, who is a man driven to the same negative simplification by a revolt against very positive wrongs. But there is one type of person for whom I feel what I can only call contempt. And that is the popular propagandist of what he or she absurdly describes as Birth-Control.

I despise Birth-Control first because it is a weak and wobbly and cowardly word. It is also an entirely meaningless word; and is used so as to curry favour even with those who would at first recoil from its real meaning. The proceeding these quack doctors recommend does not control any birth. It only makes sure that there shall never be any birth to control. It cannot for instance, determine sex, or even make any selection in the style of the pseudo-science of Eugenics. Normal people can only act so as to produce birth; and these people can only act so as to prevent birth. But these people know perfectly well as I do that the very word Birth-Prevention would strike a chill into the public, the instant it was blazoned on headlines, or proclaimed on platforms, or scattered in advertisements like any other quack medicine. They dare not call it by its name, because its name is very bad advertising. Therefore they use a conventional and unmeaning word, which may make the quack medicine sound more innocuous.

Second, I despise Birth-Control because it is a weak and wobbly and cowardly thing. It is not even a step along the muddy road they call Eugenics; it is a flat refusal to take the first and most obvious step along the road of Eugenics. Once grant that their philosophy is right, and their course of action is obvious; and they dare not take it; they dare not even declare it. If there is no authority in things which Christendom has called moral, because their origins were mystical, then they are clearly free to ignore all the difference between animals and men; and treat men as we treat animals. They need not palter with the stale and timid compromise and convention called Birth-Control. Nobody applies it to the cat. The obvious course for Eugenists is to act towards babies as they act towards kittens. Let all the babies be born; and then let us drown those we do not like. I cannot see any objection to it; except the moral or mystical sort of objection that we advance against Birth-Prevention. And that would be real and even reasonable Eugenics; for we could then select the best, or at least the healthiest, and sacrifice what are called the unfit. By the weak compromise of Birth-Prevention, we are very probably sacrificing the fit and only producing the unfit. The births we prevent may be the births of the best and most beautiful children; those we allow, the weakest or worst. Indeed, it is probable; for the habit discourages the early parentage of young and vigorous people; and lets them put off the experience to later years, mostly from mercenary motives. Until I see a real pioneer and progressive leader coming out with a good, bold, scientific programme for drowning babies, I will not join the movement.

But there is a third reason for my contempt, much deeper and therefore more difficult to express; in which is rooted all my reasons for being anything I am or attempt to be; and above all, for being a Distributist. Perhaps the nearest to a description of it is to say this: that my contempt boils over into bad behaviour when I hear the common suggestion that a birth is avoided because people want to be "free" to go to the cinema or buy a gramophone or a loud-speaker. What makes me want to walk over such people like doormats is that they use the word "free." By every act of that sort they chain themselves to the most servile and mechanical system yet tolerated by men. The cinema is a machine for unrolling certain regular patterns called pictures; expressing the most vulgar millionaires' notion of the taste of the most vulgar millions. The gramophone is a machine for recording such tunes as certain shops and other organisations choose to sell. The wireless is better; but even that is marked by the modern mark of all three; the impotence of the receptive party. The amateur cannot challenge the actor; the householder will find it vain to go and shout into the gramophone; the mob cannot pelt the modern speaker, especially when he is a loud-speaker. It is all a central mechanism giving out to men exactly what their masters think they should have.

Now a child is the very sign and sacrament of personal freedom. He is a fresh free will added to the wills of the world; he is something that his parents have freely chosen to produce and which they freely agree to protect. They can feel that any amusement he gives (which is often considerable) really comes from him and from them and from nobody else. He has been born without the intervention of any master or lord. He is a creation and a contribution; he is their own creative contribution to creation. He is also a much more beautiful, wonderful, amusing and astonishing thing than any of the stale stories or jingling jazz tunes turned out by the machines. When men no longer feel that he is so, they have lost the appreciation of primary things, and therefore all sense of proportion about the world. People who prefer the mechanical pleasures, to such a miracle, are jaded and enslaved. They are preferring the very dregs of life to the first fountains of life. They are preferring the last, crooked, indirect, borrowed, repeated and exhausted things of our dying Capitalist civilisation, to the reality which is the only rejuvenation of all civilisation. It is they who are hugging the chains of their old slavery; it is the child who is ready for the new world.

G. K. Chesterton, "Babies and Distributism," from The Well and the Shallows

I hope you enjoyed that little article as much as I have. Little did Chesterton know... or perhaps he did suspect... that before long an age would come in which men would murder babies in the womb, starve them in hospital janitor closets, and openly speak in the classroom of murdering them into their first years of life postpartum.

More Beating of Drums for Death...

Montana's high court rang in the New Year by ruling that it's OK to murder sick and, presumably, very old people.  Oh, wait - that's right, it's to be called mercy killing or assisted suicide or death with dignity or some such nonsense.  The court affirmed a lower court's December 6 ruling to the same extent.

Why Montana?

Hmmm... cash-strapped state... aging population...  Well, I suppose it doesn't matter why Montana, because the whole country is headed in that direction.  It will be a perfect storm - a trifecta of previously unlikely scenarios inevitably colliding:

1. Economic pressure from our incomprehensible national debt;
2. Demographic pressure of our aging baby-boomers who are now beginning to retire in earnest;
3. Foreign pressure from our Chinese debt-masters to impose the same sort of draconian measures that we impose upon our debtor nations.

When these three factors coincide - and they will - we are gonna start gassing 'boomers like you can't believe.  Mark my words; this prediction takes no great foresight, only commonsense.  We've long since been solving our unborn problems by killing them in the privacy of the womb; now Montana's court, the first such state high court ruling in the land, says that privacy protects the "right to kill granny."  They didn't call it that, but will the aged infirm or the sick have much more voice than those in the womb?

Christians, let's resolve in 2010 to pray harder.

The Slaughter of the Innocents Goes On...

Today, Monday 28 December 2009, is the feast of the Holy Innocents, those children slaughtered by Herod (Mt 2:16) in his demented plot to destroy the Christ Child, thereby winning the notorious distinction of being the first manifestation of anti-Christ in history.  The Church recognizes his little victims as something like martyrs, even donning red on their feast day in honor of their blood.  They did not voluntarily give their lives rather than deny Christ, yet their innocence poured out still bears witness to His.

In our times, anti-Christ has been powerfully active in many modern regimes.  The Nazis and the Soviets were both explicitly anti-Christian.  They were defeated, but we must not lull ourselves into thinking that anti-Christ was, or even that his plan was delayed.  The Evil One is crafty beyond our reckoning.  I believe that part of his plan was to discredit evil itself - he has done this by psychologizing sins into mere neuroses on the one hand, and by making us think that a plan or idea cannot be evil unless it is proposed by a short man with a funny mustachio and a German accent.  We are mistaken if we believe either of those two lies.  Sin is sin, and we are all guilty of it.  Some sins are small, and others are immense.  We must use our meager powers and whatever grace God gives us to resist it all.  We cannot compromise with it, and must realize that the Enemy always tries to sell us sin by bundling it with genuine goods, because only a lunatic would pick sin otherwise.  So intimacy and pleasure, both good, are used to sell adultery; adventure and profit, both good, are used to convince people to burgle or rob.

Now health care is being used to push abortion.  Make no mistake - unless the law specifically forbids the funding of abortion, it will be slipped in as one more entitlement.  If the developers of the health care proposals under consideration did not want abortions to be funded directly or with subsidies, they would include prohibitive provisions in their bills.  And I can think of no better way - nor can Uncle Sam - to encourage something, other than to pay for it.
Please pray for Bart Stupak (D-MI) and the group he is rousing to resist this atrocity, this holocaust to Moloch. Rumor has it that he and his group are already being brought under tremendous pressure from the highest levels.

Fellow Americans, we are capable of helping each other out without paying to kill each other's babies.  America, we can do better than abortion!

The War in the House

Leaders among pro-life Democrats in the House of Representatives include Bart Stupak, Tim Holden, Kathy  Dahlkemper, James Oberstar, Dan Boren, Gene Taylor, and Jim Marshall.  Of these, only one (Dan Boren) is non-Catholic.  We've all heard about how many of the leaders of the pro-abortion lobby in the House describe themselves as "Catholic."

This is huge.  It means, as far as I can tell, that what we are witnessing unfolding is not a battle between Democrats and Republicans over abortion or abortion-funding.  We are witnessing a battle among Catholics, with the United States House of Representatives as the battlefield, and government-funded abortion as the current strategic target.  This is huge.  It may be apocalyptic in the truest sense of the word.

The Greek word apocalypsis means "unveiling" and is translated into Latin as revelatio, from which we get the word "revelation."  The Book of Revelation, by prophesying about events at the end of the time, ought to expose us to ourselves.  It ought to make us stop and think, "Say, what side am I on?  Have I really given it over to Christ?  Or do I just want to feel good about myself by calling myself a Christian?"  We are seeing such a revelatory conflict now in our legislature.  It is to some degree a microcosm of America, where the same conflict as a whole is underway.  It is easy to call oneself Catholic and to play that card whenever convenient, as a sort of credential about having roots or deeper values or something.  It is a lot more difficult to actually sink roots and stand for something, like, say Jesus Christ.  It might sound revolutionary, I know, or radical, or even revolting, but that's what I thought "Catholic" meant.

Now we are seeing in our legislature and in our society as a whole who has actually believed that, and who has only used that popular belief to their own personal gain.

Again, no need to worry.  This stuff is all over the gospels and epistles.  Jesus himself told us that these things would happen so that when they did, our faith in Him would be deepened rather than shaken.  Let's keep praying, doing what we can, and trusting in Him.

Will Stupak Strike Again?

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) has said that he finds the Senate's "pro-life" amendment to be unacceptable. Some people are hoping he'll lead a sally of House Democrats to kill Obamacare when the reconciliation committee is done building its Frankenstein from the House and Senate bills.

I am not too worried about Obamacare passing - at least, not worried enough to go on a crusade about it. I think it will be a catastrophic mistake, but merely a economic-political one, that is, a merely this-worldly mistake. It will be a secular mistake rammed down the throats of Americans by a secularist minority. That's bad, but it's also nothing new. Entitlements are created, entitlements can be eliminated or privatized - look at welfare reform.

It's abortion that's the problem. Funding abortion, subsidizing abortion, paying for other things so that people have leftover money to buy abortions - it's all just one big encouragement, especially for the poor and vulnerable - to murder their babies and to lose their souls. Lost lives are never reclaimed, and alas, too many lost souls go unredeemed. We Christians cannot sit by idly and chatter aimlessly about such things.

I do not hope that Stupak will kill Obamacare, though that would be nice because our country is teetering on the edge of economic ruin - and I don't mean the recession - I mean the colossal debt we've racked up. I DO hope that Stupak will be willing and able to kill Obamacare, and will do so, rather than let it finance the slaughter of innocents.

We need to pray for Rep. Stupak, a fellow Catholic who is faithful to the teachings of the Church, and also for those Democrats especially that are aligned with him.  He will certainly come under intense pressure from the unscrupulous faux Catholics that run the House.

Strategies for a Pro-Life America

Here's the beginning of a paper that I recently wrote about the general approach of our bishops to overturning Roe v. Wade and creating a culture of life:

In January of 2008, Georgia Catholic Bishops Kevin Boland and Wilton Gregory announced that they would not lend their support to the Georgia state human life amendment that many pro-life leaders were pushing. Why would two Catholic bishops refuse to back a bill that sought to defend life from the moment of conception? In order to understand the pro-life position today and the various strategies that are promoted in the movement, it is first necessary to review the impact of Roe v. Wade. This paper will first review the Court’s decision in Roe and analyze the past pro-life strategies for overturning it. It will investigate the two predominant “camps”—those who seek state constitutional amendments and those who favor an “incrementalist” approach—and detail how each envisions bringing about a pro-life legal system and culture. Lastly, the brunt of this paper will evaluate the state human life amendment approach and show how it is fraught with theological, philosophical, legal, and political
misunderstandings.

Click here to read the rest of the paper...

Watch Chris Matthews Be Rude As All-Hell to a Bishop

But I warn you, I was greatly irritated by the whole thing. If you watch this, promise to email Chris Matthews and tell him to let his guests get a word in edgewise.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Matthews didn't beat Bishop Tobin of Providence, RI in a debate; he just beat him up - and not with reasons, but with rudeness, interruptions, and haranguing. I am surprised that the bishop even agreed to go on the show. The people who are fighting us on this do not fight fair. That much should be clear to everyone by now.

Never Give Up - Nick Vujicic Explains Why

This guy's name is Nick Vujicic. He is amazing to me.

People like Nick are monkeywrenches in the abortion movement. Why do I say that? Because he is the sort of person whom they use as an excuse to abort babies - you know, "fetal abnormality" or "severe handicap." Funny thing is, he seems to prefer life to death; and what's worse for them, he seems happy.

Bishop Tobin Lays the Smackdown

The Most Reverend Thomas Tobin, by the Grace of God bishop of Providence, has just given Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) a beat-down like he has perhaps never before received. The two have been quarreling about what it means to be Catholic. Apparently, Congressman Kennedy thinks that having a famous uncle or grandfather, or having been baptized as an infant, means that nothing one can do can make one "less of a Catholic." His shepherd disagrees and is unafraid to go at it with him.

Good for you, Bishop Tobin! God bless you for your charitable forthrightness, clear shepherding, and defense of the flock and its faith. May God bless you a hundredfold for ever curse hurled at you by enemies of Holy Church and our holy religion.

There's no need to go picking fights with people, but this bozo congressman picked a fight with the Church for saying that hey, maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't be eagerly supporting health care reform that funds the butchering of children.

Read the most reverend bishop's letter by clicking here. It is available online now, and will appear in print in Thursday's edition of the local Catholic paper. Between Bishop Tobin's stern (and sometimes eye-popping, to be frank) words to the congressman under his care and the words Archbishop Dolan (of New York City) to the New York Times, we are starting to see some bishops unafraid to brawl in public.

Triumph of Democracy

In a breathtaking change of tack, Congressional Democratic leadership has decided to behave democratically. They are going to allow the House to vote on the overwhelmingly popular position to exclude federal funding from federal health care spending. Rep. Bart Stupak (R-Mich) and a group of a few dozen Democrats should be applauded for putting principle above party loyalty. The Democrat machine might try to grind them out of politics, but God will reward them.

Now the Washington Post reports that the Stupak amendment has been inserted to the House Democrats' catastrophe on a vote of 240-194. Whether the plan is stupid and ruinous for our nation, at least now we can be reasonably sure that it will not fund, either directly or surreptitiously, the murder of unborn children.

Thank you, Congressman Stupak!

The blogosphere is filled with rants of people who feel women are somehow being abused by the Stupak Amendment. In reality, their own logic is being turned against them, as is the tide of American thinking generally, and they are bitter and frustrated.  The vote on the Stupak Amendment seems to more or less coincide with the majority of Americans, who believe they should not be compelled through taxation to pay for an act they believe to be morally ambiguous or worse.  Abortion supporters continue to speak out of both sides of their mouth.  On the one hand, as a normal medical/surgical treatment, they want abortion funded.  On the other hand, as a private choice, they do not want it regulated by government authority.  On the one hand, they say that abortion is a personal decision between a woman and her doctor.  On the other hand, they want it funded - apparently by everyone BUT the woman or her doctor.  The moral nonsense is compounded by legal nonsense.

It is heartening that Americans are starting to wake up.

News from New York

I am up in New York state, here:

Plattsburgh is a nice town. It is the only town in this neck of the woods, for a long ways, in any way. Burlington, Vermont is actually fairly close - but it is across Lake Champlain, the crossing of which requires considerable time waiting for a ferry or to go around the lank, or by the bridge near the Canadian border.  It's not as cold as you'd think, and it's not as "liberal" (what a lie, in its modern usage, that word is!) as the rest of New York is (thought to be, at least).  This congressional district is the largest in the country, geographically speaking, and one of the most sparsely populated.  It is the size of Connecticut, and most of its towns' populations are counted in the hundreds and scores, not in the thousands or tens of thousands.  People here are not rich.  They do not frequent health clubs or expensive universities.  If they want a helping hand, they want it from their neighbor, or from their family or pastor, or maaaaaybe from their mayor - but NOT from their Uncle Sam.  They fear that Uncle Sam would rather be a Big Brother.  I fear with them, and in many things think like those with whom we have spoken.

I am here doing something I have never done before.  I am working in a political campaign.  The GOP apparatchiks decided to put a candidate on the ballot, and God alone knows why, that has nothing to do with the GOP - Dede Scozzafava.  She is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, and pro-public option.  More mystifying, she has nothing to do with the views of Republicans in the area, evinced by the fact that they are defecting in massive numbers to support a local party's candidate, Doug Hoffman of the Conservative Party.  She trailed increasingly in the poles behind not only the Democratic candidate, but also behind Hoffman. Since bowing out of the election race, she has endorsed the Democratic candidate!

I came up hear to post signs and hand out leaflets for three reasons, even though politics isn't normally my thing:

1. If our democracy is to be healed, we need more political parties, ones that stand for things - anything at all, almost - rather than merely seek power;
2. Big party bosses are entirely out of touch with their constituents in an increasingly obvious and ridiculous way - see above;
3. Our President and his administration and the congress need to be reminded that they were elected as moderates and that their political careers are mortal.

Coincidentally, after the poorly supported Republican candidate's abandonment of the race, most of her supporters seem to be joining up with the Conservative candidate whom the Republican leadership would not nominate.  This additional support is giving him a clear lead in a state where only a plurality of votes is necessary to gain office.  Tomorrow we will stand in the rain and give out leaflets at the polls all day, before driving home.

If you think that this neck of the woods is insignificant, think again.  It was in upstate New York that both the American abolitionist movement and the women suffragist movement were born.  This region might very well the broadcasting hub of all that is good about America, a sort of antithesis to New York City or to Hollywood.

Interesting side note: The people in this region are easily the most intelligent in the country.  They have a thing called Steward's.  Steward's is an coffee and sub shop rolled together with a gas station and a - get this - ice cream shop.  I don't mean that Steward's sells ice cream sandwiches or nutty buddies.  I mean, twenty, thirty flavors that you can mix and match, and a double scoop of their own flavors (which include black raspberry, Fourth of July, and Irish Cream, inter al.) costs a mere $2.50.  When you stop for a fill-up, you can stop for a fill-up!  It's BRILLIANT.  Between the scenery, the nice folks, and the Steward's ice cream, this place is like a piece of heaven.

Planned Parenthood Clinic Director Has Change of Heart

I couldn't get the story or accomapanying video to embed, so check it out here.

Also, see here for a list of some other abortion providers who have had changes of heart and no long participate in the destruction of the innocent, but instead help to save their lives.

Thanks Mary Ann, for the story.

Europe Is Not So Far Gone Yet

I tried to embed a video about pro-life demonstrations in Madrid. I couldn't get it to work, so check it out here instead. We make a big mistake if we think that the Church and authentic human values in general have died in Europe.