The Honor Of God

As pro-lifers from across America gather for this year’s 35th Annual March for Life, we are proud to be part of a visible force in the public debate that has surrounded the abortion issue. Over the years, the movement has weathered many a storm and today is ready, relevant and resilient as we face the future. When the infamous Roe v. Wade decision was first imposed upon the American people in 1973, abortion seemed irreversible. The abortion movement was riding on the wavecrest of the Sexual Revolution of the sixties that turned morality upside down. The media created the false impression that everyone supported abortion-on-demand. Abortion soon became an industry with tens of millions of dollars at stake. At the same time, the pro-life position was virtually shut out from a voice in the public square. Abortion advocates seemed intent upon isolating pro-life Americans by writing them off as part of some outdated religious fringe that would gradually fade away. A Refusal to Be Isolated Such feminist hopes failed to materialize. Protests have only proliferated. Scores of abortion clinics have been shut down. The tens of thousands who trek every January 22 to the nation’s capital and so many other major cities and state capitals are testimony to a growing movement that shows no signs of fading. Today the pro-life movement is relevant because of its stubborn refusal to be isolated. Instead of retreating from the debate, we have responded by literally appearing in the public square in front of abortion facilities nationwide. Instead of being ashamed of our “unpopular” message, we have proclaimed it everywhere—on radio waves, web sites, billboards and truck panels. Rather than writing off the new generations, we have recruited young people who have swelled our ranks and guaranteed our future. Our public witness has paid off. Abortion is a major issue that will not go away. It is far from “settled law” as cracks in the foundation of Roe v. Wade are beginning to appear that, for abortionists, are quite unsettling. Indeed, it is the aging feminists that run the risk of fading away. A Refusal to Let Abortionists Frame the Public Debate With noble obstinacy, we have achieved these results because we have refused to let the abortionists frame the debate in the public square. Pro-life activists have consistently highlighted the broad scope of the killing of the unborn. We do not hesitate to call abortion a moral issue and appeal to God’s law that forbids the taking of innocent human life. We affirm that any moral wrong undermines the common good and therefore harms all members of society. On every front, the pro-life movement has consistently pointed out the many victims of abortion. First and foremost, there are the infants themselves that are brutally slaughtered in the womb that should be a protective sanctuary. Mothers who abort become victims of their self-inflicted trauma, suffering incalculable psychological and physical harm so often ignored by major media. Abortion destroys the family and harms all society by promoting a mentality that debases human life and exalts promiscuity. Such a wide perspective has served to broaden the support for the pro-life cause. The result is that huge sectors of the American public now reject abortion while those in the middle have major reservations and doubts. Trying to Shift Focus In response to the pro-life offensive, the pro-abortion movement has long abandoned its earlier rhetoric emphasizing abortion’s broad “liberating” benefits and now tries to make abortion a strictly private matter. Indeed, the more the pro-life movement has stressed the broad scope of abortion, the more abortion advocates narrow it down. Pro-abortion marketers spin their message with talismanic words like “choice” and “privacy.” They seem to relegate the issue to that of a mere “women’s health” concern that has no place outside the doctor’s office. Mantra-like slogans declare “abortion is a personal decision between a woman and her doctor.” They oxymoronically classify the deliberate killing of an innocent human being as “reproductive rights.” They illogically proclaim the preeminence of individual “conscience” while subverting it in order to kill an unborn child. And while this tactic may shift the focus from a social issue to a personal decision, it also tends to erode broad support for the nefarious practice since that choice always appears shrouded in personal tragedy. This negative perception has tended to isolate the abortion promoters from mainstream America. A Refusal to Make Abortion Private By marching in Washington, D.C. and other cities throughout the country, the pro-life movement signals its refusal to make abortion a private matter. We must keep it in the public spotlight. In their failure to win the debate in the public square, abortion advocates are now resorting to tactics that silence opponents, avoid controversy and maintain secrecy. They are pushing for constitutionally-questionable ordinances making ever-widening “protective bubbles” that prevent pro-life protesters from exercising their First Amendment rights in front of clinics. They have built fortress-like abortion centers which isolate them further from local communities. Hiding behind the battlements of “privacy,” abortion providers have been accused of breaking the law by falsifying medical records and not reporting adults who abuse minors who subsequently seek abortions. We assert our right to be heard and resist those who would force us from our duty to oppose abortion in the public square. In our struggle against abortion, we have also made our prayers public. Making our Prayers Public In our struggle against abortion, we have also made our prayers public. Prayers at protests and rallies have wrought miracles. They have given courage to pro-lifers against those who scorn them. These prayers have closed facility doors and converted those who once practiced abortion. They have changed the mind of those who wavered toward abortion and took the joyful option of bringing a child to term. We are confident that all our pleas are not in vain. And if we continue in our public prayer and protests, we will witness yet more miracles. We must thus redouble our efforts and prayers, confident that God will grant us the final victory.

Last Updated ( Thursday, April 17 2008 )

Join the struggle >>>>>   http://www.tfp.org/index.php/?option=com_content&task=view&id=690

Focus Shifts to Archbishop Wuerl; Washington Prelate on Hotseat on Pro-Abortion Politicians

 

By Hilary White

WASHINGTON, April 29, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - At the same time as praise and gratitude pours into the office of New York’s Cardinal Egan from the pro-life community for his firm statements on the necessity of denying Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians, all eyes are now turning to Washington’s Archbishop Donald Wuerl who remains evasive after Senator John Kerry and other prominently pro-abortion Catholic politicians were photographed receiving the Eucharist at the Pope’s Mass.

Wuerl has issued a statement saying, “How to respond to those in public office who support abortion legislation is open to various legitimate pastoral approaches.” This is in sharp contrast to a letter sent four years ago by then-Cardinal Ratzinger saying unequivocally that such public figures “must” be refused Holy Communion.

The New York archdiocese issued a statement saying that the former mayor, Rudolph Giuliani had agreed to refrain from reception of Communion at Mass “because of his well-known support of abortion” and Cardinal Egan said he will be seeking a meeting with Giuliani over the issue. The archdiocese informed LifeSiteNews.com that the issue was being brought forward publicly at this time “because it has become a public issue and a public question.”

But, Giuliani was far from the only notoriously pro-abortion politician who not only received Communion at the Papal Masses, but issued statements ahead of time saying they would do so. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sens. John Kerry, Christopher Dodd and Edward M. Kennedy all attended the Mass in Nationals Park in Washington at the personal invitation of Archbishop Wuerl, and were photographed receiving Holy Communion. Although the news was widespread, along with photos, no statement of correction has been forthcoming from the Washington archdiocese, even while Pope Benedict remained in the US.

Robert Novak, the political commentator and convert to Catholicism, wrote yesterday in the New York Post that the failure to address the situation with a public correction “reflected disobedience to Benedict by the archbishops of New York and Washington.” Now that the Cardinal Archbishop of New York has stepped up to the plate, others are wondering where Archbishop Wuerl’s response is.

But the question of why Archbishop Wuerl has not issued any statement is easy to answer, Novak says. “Wuerl is averse,” he said, “to colliding with powerful laymen”.

“He could have avoided any confrontation at Nationals Park by simply not inviting the pro-choice politicians to a mass where there was no room for the vast majority of Catholics who wanted to attend.”

In the past, Archbishop Wuerl has refused to address the issue of publicly pro-abortion politicians who continue to receive Communion on his episcopal doorstep. Today, in a statement quoted in the New York Times, Wuerl repeated his contradiction of the Pope, saying that there is no absolute ground for refusing Communion.

The statement claimed that Archbishop Wuerl had “consistently and persistently presented the Church’s clear teaching on the evil of abortion and the need for those in public office to recognize that the support of abortion is wrong.”

It then attempted to pass the responsibility on: “The decision concerning the refusal of holy communion to an individual can best be made by the bishop in the person’s home diocese with whom he or she presumably is in conversation.”

But such evasions are not holding water with Catholics who have watched the scandal for years. Philip Lawler, editor of Catholic World News wrote in an editorial that Cardinal Egan’s statement “corrects the record and prevents the further dissemination of a very misleading and damaging perception about Catholic Church teaching and pastoral practice”.

Lawler writes, “It came a bit late, but the public statement by Cardinal Egan chastising Rudy Giuliani is a major step forward for Church leadership in the US. The follow-up question is unavoidable: Why hasn’t Archbishop Wuerl made a similar statement?”

The most prominent Catholic pro-life organisation in the US, American Life League, has issued statements of gratitude to Cardinal Egan that even more firmly underscore the dereliction of duty in Washington.

Judie Brown, American Life League’s president, said, “Those who are in public life -claim to be Catholic- and support abortion are indeed persisting in a grave sin.”

“American Life League’s Crusade for the Defense of Our Catholic Church has been asking American Bishops to enforce Canon 915 since our campaign began in 2003.  We are indeed gratified that Cardinal Egan has seen this as a priority as well.  Protecting Christ from sacrilege is an honor and we applaud Cardinal Egan for making this clear.”

To contact Archbishop Wuerl
 P.O. Box 29260
Washington, DC 20017-0260
Phone: 301-853-4500

Archdiocesan Director of Communications
Susan Gibbs
sgibbs@adw.org
Phone: 301-853-4517

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
New York Cardinal Egan Slams Giuliani for Receiving Communion at Papal Mass - Demands Meeting
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/08042803.html

HLI Leader Says: “I don’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07011604.html

First Things’ Fr. Neuhaus Criticizes Archbishop Wuerl on Pro-Abortion Politicians Fiasco
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07012501.html

Washington Archbishop Wuerl Speaks Again on Communion for Pro-Abortion Politicians
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jul/07070602.html

Will New Archbishop of Washington Deny Pro-Abort Nancy Pelosi Communion at Jan. 3 Showcase Mass?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06122005.html

Palin calls her baby born last week with Down Syndrome a “gift”

By Michael Baggot

JUNEAU, Alaska, April 24, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - After refusing to introduce two abortion restricting bills to a special session on a natural gas pipeline on Wednesday because of fears that the bills would not likely succeed, Governor Sarah Palin expressed her willingness to bring the legislation to separate sessions.

House Bill 301 would forbid partial birth abortions, while House Bill 364 would require parental consent for women under 17 seeking abortion.

Senate President Lyda Green called on Palin to incorporate the two bills into the pipeline special session after the bills failed to pass the House.

Palin argued that Green should have used her position to support the two bills before they died at the end of the regular legislative session on April 13.

“Senate President Green did not exhaust every possible option during the regular session to move the legislation,” said Palin.

“As you are aware, I fully support these bills.”

“Alaskans know I am pro-life and have never wavered in my belief in the sanctity of every human life.  These issues are so important they shouldn’t be diluted with oil and gas deliberations,” added Palin.

Palin asked Senate leaders to examine how best to advance legislation similar to the two failed bills and suggested the possibility of a separate session for abortion restricting legislation, provided Green could “show a path to success.”

Palin expressed disagreement with the Alaska Supreme Court when it overturned a 1997 parental consent law in 2007.

“She feels parental consent is reasonable because it is required in nearly every aspect of a child’s life. It’s a parent’s right and responsibility to be involved in their child’s life,” spokeswoman Sharon Leighow told the Juneau Empire.

Leighow added that Palin supported a constitutional amendment requiring parental consent for abortions.

On Friday, Palin gave birth one month earlier than expected to a child with Down Syndrome. 

“We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives.  We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place.  We are truly blessed,” Palin stated

Palin’s decision to give birth to her child is unusual, since currently more than 80% of children with Down Syndrome are aborted.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

“Airbrushing Diversity”: Parents of Down Syndrome Children Tell of Abortion Pressures
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/mar/08030303.html