Take Action to Defend Religious Liberty

Find other ways to take action by clicking HERE.

Don't buy what the mainstream media is selling. This is not about birth control or "those crazy Catholics."





UPDATE: "Senate votes, 51-48, to table the Blunt Amendment, which would have allowed employers and insurers to opt out of parts of the Obama health care law -- in particular, birth control -- on moral or religious grounds."


Click HERE to read the USCCB News Release


How did Catholic Senators vote? Read about it at the National Catholic Register.

"So here's to the women leaders in Congress -- and to the nuns -- "

Heretics among us are receiving thanks from the leader of Planned Parenthood, each of them requiring our prayers - each of them needing to be fitted for asbestos suits - just in case. From Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood President, on our recent Health Care Reform bill, now law:




"Some ask why didn't we yell even louder than we did? Why didn't we overturn the Hyde amendment, which has unfairly prevented poor women from having their health insurance -- Medicaid-- pay for abortion? The simple and discouraging truth is that we have an anti-choice House of Representatives. With the help of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund's political action committee, things got better in 2008, with the election of 28 new pro-choice members of the House and, more importantly, eight new pro-choice U.S. senators. But if you're scoring, when the House voted for the first time on the Stupak abortion ban, 64 Democrats voted in favor of the ban. There are way too many members of Congress who are opposed to women's rights and who vote that way every session -- Republicans and Democrats.

...

And in the last days, when Congressman Stupak and the National Conference of Catholic Bishops threatened to bring down health care reform completely over their narrow demands, the true heroine for women's health was Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She never blinked. In the final hours, when congressional leadership and the White House were scrambling for any vote they could get to reach the magic 216, Speaker Pelosi put herself in the way of the anti-choice steamroller. In private and in public, she vowed that there would be no health care bill if it included the Stupak abortion ban.

And in the final days before the bill was passed, it was the Roman Catholic nuns who most importantly broke with the bishops and the Vatican to announce their support for health care reform. This brave and important move, demonstrating that they cared as much about the health care of families in America as they did about church hierarchy, was a critical demonstration of support. Bart Stupak may not ask the nuns for advice, as he recently announced to the press, but maybe next time he should.

...

It has been a long and difficult process to get health care passed, and the work isn't over yet. But we need more than health care; we need women and men elected to office who will stand up for our health and our rights, even when it's hard. So here's to the women leaders in Congress -- and to the nuns -- and to the women everywhere who were counting on them. They need our gratitude and our support."--Huffington Post

"Sister" Simone Campbell

____________

When Catholics are given a pat on the back by the leader of Planned Parenthood, everyone must take notice.  Obviously, the one receiving congratulatory 'warm fuzzies' has strayed far from the Shepherd. 

Washington Continues Challenge of Eighth Commandment

It seems that the truth-challenged (politically correct term for liar, just so as not to offend anyone) leader of the United States does not approve of the Stupak Amendment in the Health Care Bill which recently passed by a narrow margin in the House of Representatives. This story was reported in many media outlets, but I wanted to be certain to link to a 'news' site which is not wholly offensive to the leftists (ie: FOX News). From CNN:

In an interview that aired Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union, Obama adviser David Axelrod reiterated the president’s position on how abortion should be handled in the debate over health care reform.
“The president has said repeatedly, and he said in his speech to Congress, that he doesn’t believe that this bill should change the status quo as it relates to the issue of abortion,” Axelrod told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King. “He’s going to work with the Senate and the House to try to ensure that at the end of the day the status quo is not changed.”
Asked specifically whether the Stupak amendment changed the status quo, Axelrod replied “I think it’s fair to say the bill Congress passed does change the status quo. But I believe there are discussions ongoing as to how to change it accordingly.”
King asked Axelrod whether the president would sign a final health care bill that contains the Stupak amendment. Likening it to Obama’s position on the public health insurance, Axelrod said Obama “believes both these issues and can and will be worked through before [the final bill] reaches his desk.”

You may recall his address to Congress on September 9th. He stated with great conviction
"And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up -- under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place."

Will the real President Obama please come forward?

"A bad name and disgrace will you acquire: 'That for the evil man with double tongue!'" -- Sirach 6:1b

"Funding programs that aim to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies is essential" -- Sen. Charles Schumer

Found this in my inbox today:

Dear Mrs. H_____:

Thank you for your letter opposing the health care reform that lacks a ban on federal funding for abortion.

As the father of two daughters, I share your deep respect for the sanctity of life and realize the importance of honoring one’s moral and religious heritage. I also value the freedom of all American citizens to base their personal choices on their own values and moral convictions. I also support measures that aim to reduce the number of abortions, and I believe that education and prevention are critical to achieving that.

The decision to have an abortion will never be an easy one, nor should it be. While I believe that every woman should have the right to make her own decision, in counsel with her physician, family, and religious adviser, I also believe that funding programs that aim to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies is essential.

Thank you for contacting me on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can ever be of assistance to you on this or any other matter.




Sincerely,

Charles E. Schumer
United States Senator

Please do not respond to this email. To send another message please visit my website at http://schumer.senate.gov/SchumerWebsite/contact/webform.cfm . Thank you.

_________________

My response:

Dear. Senator Schumer:

Why do you think it is important to reduce the number of abortions performed if you support abortion rights? Either they are acceptable or not - which is it, Senator?

You stated the following:

"...funding programs that aim to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies is essential."

Reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies begins before a pregnancy begins - not after. How does abortion reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, Senator? It only encourages further reckless behavior. It is not a method of birth control, sir. It is a method of genocide. It leaves women with life-long emotional scars knowing that they took the life of their own child. Most women who abort their child have done so several times. In a nation where it is a federal offense to trample a sea turtle egg, we encourage irresponsible sex and the subsequent killing of our children. Children that are wanted - desperately - by parents across the country. To pay for such an abomination in the name of every tax paying citizen in American is shameful.

I got it - abortion is legal in the U.S. That is painfully clear. Why must I pay for them? It is all blood money and you sir, should be ashamed. There is a reason that Americans are so displeased with Congress - you do what you want, how you want without any regard for the majority of your constituents. You are not the senator of NYC - you are a New York State Senator.

Sincerely,

Kelly

__________________________

The Senator on the issue of abortion:

• Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
• Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
• Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
• Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
• Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
• Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
• Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
• Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
• Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
• Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
• Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
• Expand contraceptive services for low-income women. (May 2006)
• Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
• Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
• Protect the reproductive rights of women. (Jan 1993)
• Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
• Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception. (Jan 2009)

Obama's Health Care Speech - Fact Check

Obama's Health Care Speech

From Factcheck.org:

"The president said "no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." But the House bill would permit a public option to cover all abortions, and would also permit federal subsidies to be used to purchase private insurance that covers all abortions, a point that raises objections from anti-abortion groups. That's true despite a technical ban on use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion coverage."

Abortion

The president insisted that no federal money would pay for abortions:

Obama: [U]nder our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.

The truth of that depends on what is meant by federal dollars. Actually, as we've written before, under Democratic legislation now before Congress, the public option would cover abortions in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother and could cover all abortions if the administration chooses, and as Obama once promised. Private insurance plans purchased with the help of federal subsidies to low- and moderate-income workers also could cover all abortions, as many, if not most, private plans do today.

Under an amendment adopted by a House committee, abortions would be paid for by the "public option" only with money collected from policyholders in the form of premiums, not with money collected from taxpayers. But is money collected by the government and paid out to abortion providers by the government œfederal dollars"? The anti-abortion side says yes. And the same goes for federal subsidies given to low- and moderate-income persons to help them buy insurance. If they use those dollars to buy private policies that cover all abortions, does that mean federal dollars go to fund abortions? Again, abortion foes say yes.

The advocates of abortion rights argue otherwise. They say the House bill would be an extension of longstanding policy under the Hyde amendment, which forbids use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund Medicaid abortions except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother's life, but also allows states to use their own Medicaid money to fund other abortions (and 17 of them do). In any case, the matter is not so simple or clear as the president would like it to seem."

______________

And...

From the USCCB, press release September 10, 2009 (taking the President at his word):

WASHINGTON—Calling it an important contribution to a crucial national debate, officials speaking on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops welcomed President Obama's September 9 address on health care reform, particularly his statements regarding abortion and the uninsured.

"We agree that 'no one should go broke because they get sick,'" said Kathy Saile, Director of Domestic Social Development at the USCCB. "That's why the U.S. Bishops have worked for decades for decent health care for all. The Catholic Church provides health care for millions, purchases health care, picks up the pieces of a failing health system, and has a long tradition of teaching on ethics in health care. Health care reform that respects the life and dignity of all is a moral imperative and urgent national priority. We welcome the President's speech as an important contribution to this essential national debate and task."

"We especially welcome the President's commitment to exclude federal funding of abortion, and to maintain existing federal laws protecting conscience rights in health care," said Richard Doerflinger, Associate Director of Pro-Life Activities at the USCCB. "We believe that incorporating essential and longstanding federal laws on these issues into any new proposal will strengthen support for health care reform. We will work with Congress and the Administration to ensure that these protections are clearly reflected in new legislation, so no one is required to pay for or take part in abortion as a result of health care reform."

"We agree with the President that there are details that need to be ironed out," said Saile. "And with his address last night, we see the opportunity to work towards a truly universal health policy with respect for human life and dignity, access for all with a special concern for the poor, and inclusion of legal immigrants. We also see the possibility of meeting the bishops' goal to pursue the common good and preserve pluralism, including freedom of conscience and a variety of options, and restraining costs and applying them equitably across the spectrum of payers."

ACTION NEEDED - Health Care Bill(s) and Abortion

I am not certain how one can consider abortion to be entirely an issue pertaining to privacy and then out of the other side of their mouths it is a medical issue. Don't get me started about the health of a murdered child - and the fact that a dead child is not a healthy one.

As the Obama administration pushes the current 'health care' legislation, only the stiff-necked are able to ignore the plight of the unborn and the infirm - both unable to fight for their own privacy and health. What they will not tell you, and have repeatedly lied about, is that abortion WILL be included in any and all proposals. Through the front door, the side or the back - the United States of America will demand that her citizens fund abortions as part of a 'health care' program.

Mr. Obama, you and your ilk are liars. Again, I post the above link to a non-partisan site: Factcheck.org .

"As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a "public plan" and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions."

The National Right to Life Committee has declared the situation CONDITION RED and all Christians need to either step up or step aside. Either you take up the Cross or you discard it.

Take action HERE.

Read the latest updates HERE.

Print out a .pdf fact sheet on the health care bill proposals HERE.

E-mail your representatives, call their offices, send this information to your friends, neighbors, local media, church members. Your involvement is imperative.

____________

Side ponderable: Do you think that rhinoplasty and breast augmentation are going to be included in the health care plan? I mean, you wouldn't want someone to be punished with 'imperfections', would you?

____________

9-11-2009

Just to be certain that you are absolutely aware of what we are up against, in regard to others who refer to themselves as Catholic, I want to share with you some commentary from a Catholic online forum in regard to this topic:

"...... I would just like to say that all those abortions the occurred from 1974 to today.

Water under the bridge, right ?

Lets move on."

"Pro-lifers are never satified. "
-----
"We want a clear statement that health care reform won't include public funding of abortion"

Obama says the same in front of an international televised joint session of Congress.

"Obama is lying, we want more"

What do you want ?

Really.

I'm asking.


What IS good enough ?"

---

"....I refuse to identify myself as a pro-lifer because there are those proudly identiyfing themselves as pro-life who (and this is only a partial list):

1) wink and nod at murder.
2) Protect vandals, arsonists and batterers
3) Openly endorse violence
4) Hide behind secret organizations
5) Maintain enemies lists
6) Recruit, Cultivate, and encourage fringe people with violent tendenices
7) Just generally crying havoc
8) ..and are on the verge of letting slip the dogs of war

(That's a referance to Shakesphere - should be obvious but then again missing the obvious is why I'm writting this post)

I choose not to identify myself as pro-life because I choose not to associate myself with above said people.

I am anti-abortion."

---

"Laws can be changed pretty easily. If healthcare has some provisions that aren't to your liking, at some point in time new representatives will be bound to modify them.

Fr. Pavone himself could write a "no abortion funding" provision in the healthcare bill and it would only be a guarantee until the November, 2010 election.

Every law we have goes through periodic revision, and health care will be no different."

---

House Votes to Increase Tax Dollars for Nation’s Largest Abortion Provider, Planned Parenthood

Washington – Today the president of the Susan B. Anthony List commented on the defeat of an amendment sponsored by Representative Mike Pence (R-IN) to defund Planned Parenthood:

“Today Congress considered legislation to end federal taxpayer funding for the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood,’” said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “Representative Mike Pence offered an amendment to respect the will of the majority of pro-life Americans, the citizens who do not want their hard-earned tax dollars supporting abortion providers. Our U.S. Government should promote real assistance for mothers that upholds the dignity of women and families, and doesn’t rely upon subsidizing abortions at every turn. I am disappointed by the House decision to reject the Pence amendment in favor of continuing President Obama’s radical abortion agenda. The Susan B. Anthony List will use every available tool to educate pro-life Americans across the country about the result of this vote. Americans will know whether or not their representative voted on the side of the pro-life taxpayer.”

The House of Representatives rejected the Pence Amendment to defund Planned Parenthood by a vote of 183 to 247. The Labor/Health and Human Services appropriations bill contains $317.5 million for the Title X Family Planning program (a $10 million or 3% increase over 2008 levels), which is a major source of funding for Planned Parenthood affiliates. Planned Parenthood is the recipient of approximately 23% of Title X Family Planning funds.

In 2008, Planned Parenthood provided nearly 290,000 abortions, accounting for approximately one in five abortions nationwide. The organization has recently come under fire for failing to report cases of statutory rape and for encouraging teen girls to lie to clinic workers in order to evade parental notification and consent laws.

Susan B. Anthony List activists have sent over 340,000 letters urging Congress to keep taxpayer funds from supporting abortion on-demand in 2009.

The Susan B. Anthony List is a nationwide network of Americans, over 158,000 residing in all 50 states, dedicated to mobilizing, advancing, and representing pro-life women in politics. Its connected Candidate Fund increases the percentage of pro-life women in the political process.

______________________

How did YOUR representatives vote? CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

U.S. Catholics: E-mail a big fat 'NO' to Congress

From the USCCB:

Congress has the most pro-abortion members in 16 years—and abortion advocates are newly energized. Their radical agenda goes beyond Roe v. Wade, and seeks to turn abortion into a fundamental “right” that the government would have to subsidize with taxpayer monies.

If the well-funded abortion lobby succeeds, abortion will become—for the first time in our country’s history—a government entitlement.

One such effort was fought back successfully when the bishops mobilized the Catholic faithful in their 1993 postcard campaign against the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA). Recent sponsors of FOCA plan to introduce a similar bill soon…and President Obama has promised to sign it if it reaches his desk.

While FOCA would achieve the abortion promotion agenda all at once, other bills could accomplish the same agenda in a piecemeal fashion. Widely supported pro-life measures in the annual appropriations bills are already at risk.

Recent polling shows that Americans strongly support laws limiting or regulating abortion, including laws honoring parental involvement in a minor daughter’s abortion decision, laws upholding the conscience rights of health care professionals, limits on abortion funding, and bans on partial-birth abortion.

To guard against the erosion of current pro-life measures—and to keep abortion from becoming a federal entitlement—our voice is needed now more than ever.

Add your voice to the millions of citizens urging our government to “oppose FOCA or any similar measure, and retain laws against federal funding and promotion of abortion.” As pro-life messages start flooding in from their constituents, members of Congress will see that they should avoid dividing our nation with policies that offend the pro-life values of the majority of Americans.

Follow this link to the NCHLA site where you can fill out a simple form (takes less than a minute) which will be forward to your US Senators and Representatives.

Catholics : Step Up or Step Aside

I begged. I pleaded. I prayed. I asked Americans to vote for life, and sadly millions of Catholics put life issues back into the deep recesses of their clouded minds. You can make excuses, call me names and pontificate all that you want about how it isn't about 'one issue' - and I will agree with you on the latter. It is about fifty million issues, all infants in various stages of development ripped to shreds from their first home - their mother's womb in the name of convenience.

Now the American Bishops are calling you into service. Are you up to it?

President Obama stated as Candidate Obama that passing the FOCA was going to be a top priority for him if elected to the Presidency.

"The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do." -- Senator Barack Obama, speaking to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

If you believe he is a man of his word, you must act now.

Here is the Senate version of the FOCA. Here is the House version of the FOCA.

Among the more than 550 federal and state laws that FOCA would nullify are:

• Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003

• Hyde Amendment (restricting taxpayer funding of abortions)

• Restrictions on abortions performed at military hospitals

• Restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion for federal employees

• Informed consent laws

• Waiting periods

• Parental consent and notification laws

• Health and safety regulations for abortion clinics

• Requirements that licensed physicians perform abortions

• “Delayed enforcement” laws (banning abortion when Roe v. Wade is overturned and/or the authority to restrict abortion is returned to the states)

• Bans on partial-birth abortion

• Bans on abortion after viability. FOCA’s apparent attempt to limit post-viability abortions is illusory. Under FOCA, post-viability abortions are expressly permitted to protect the woman’s “health.” Within the context of abortion, “health” has been interpreted so broadly that FOCA would not actually proscribe any abortion before or after viability.

• Limits on public funding for elective abortions (thus, making American taxpayers fund a procedure that many find morally objectionable)

• Limits on the use of public facilities (such has public hospitals and medical schools at state universities) for abortions

• State and federal legal protections for individual healthcare providers who decline to participate in abortions

• Legal protections for Catholic and other religiously-affiliated hospitals who, while providing care to millions of poor and uninsured Americans, refuse to allow abortions within their facilities -- Americans United for Life

FOCA would automatically overturn state abortion reporting requirements in all 50 states, 44 states' laws concerning parental involvement, 40 states' laws on restricting later-term abortions, 46 states' conscience protection laws for individual health care providers, 27 states' conscience protection laws for institutions, 38 states' bans on partial-birth abortions, 33 states' laws on requiring counseling before an abortion, and 16 states' laws concerning ultrasounds before an abortion.

Contact your Representatives and Senators NOW before this bill goes any further.

________________________________

If you reside in New York, please see this old Ponderings entry on the New York Reproductive Health and Privacy Prevention Act. Eliot Spitzer fell from his post as our Governor amid scandal yet there are many who are fighting for this proposal to become law in our state. Did you know that according to NARAL Pro-Choice New York, New Yorkers were 'trailblazers' in the pro-abortion *ahem*, 'pro-choice' movement? I guess they want us to celebrate that New York had legal abortion three years prior to Roe v. Wade being passed.

___________________________________

According to NARAL's web site (no, you're not getting a link for that one), seven states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Nevada and Washington) have legislation on the books similar to FOCA.

• In Maryland , FOCA-type legislation has been on the books since 1991. According to Planned Parenthood's Alan Guttmacher Institute, the abortion rate in the United States DECREASED nine percent since 2000 to 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 2005. By contrast, the state of Maryland in 2005 produced a rate of 31.5 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age, an INCREASE of eight percent since 1991.
• Other states with similar FOCA laws on the books show abortion rates larger than the national average of 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age:
• California has a rate of 27.1 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age. Abortions in California represent 17.3 of all abortions in the United States .
• Connecticut has a rate of 23.6 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age. The rate has increased 12% since 2000, when it was 21.1 abortions per 1,000 women.
• Hawaii has a rate of 21.8 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age.
• Nevada 's rate is 27.0 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age.

--- Family Research Council

________________________________

I confess to almighty God,

and to you, my brothers and sisters,

that I have sinned through my own fault,

in my thoughts and in my words,

in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do;

and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin,

all the angels and saints,

and you, my brothers and sisters,

to pray for me to the Lord our God.

____________________________________

From Blessed Mother Teresa ~ "What is taking place in America," she said, "is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another."

"Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants."