“What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?”

Parish bulletins often have space reserved for the pastor’s elucubrations.  Well… "elucubrations"  might overly dignify what they actually offer.

Not so the Pastor’s Page by Fr. George Welzbacher of St. John’s in St. Paul.   He usually presents a tasty and gristly chew for your mind on current events.

Check out this last week’s offering.  As Fr. W told me, "This week I didn’t even have to comment."   The arguments in what follow are pathetic and the positions are nothing short of evil.

Pastor’s Page
By Fr. George Welzbacher
  
July 29, 2007 

   May I share with you a report by Robin Toner that appeared in the July 18th issue of The New York Times. It can stand on its own without comment.

*         *         *         *          *

Democrats Attack Bush on Women’s Health Issues
                                     By Robin Toner
   In a rousing indictment of the Bush Administration and the Supreme Court it created, Senator Barack Obama told a Planned Parenthood convention here [in Washington, D.C.] on Tuesday that the next election would decide a fundamental question: "What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?"
   The speech by Mr. Obama, of Ilinois, came on a day when the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination expressed their commitment to reversing the Bush administration’s approach to abortion rights, judicial appointments, sex education and contraception.
   Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton declared that President Bush had consistently "played politics with women’s health," She added, "He has chipped away at  reproductive rights, and he has worked to turn Washington D.C., into an evidence-free zone wherefacts are subordinate to ideology."
   Mrs. Clinton, of New York, argued that the Bush administration and its conservative allies had undermined and under-financed longstanding education and family planning programs while heavily favoring abstinence education. She added, to cheers, "’I want you to know that when I’m president, I will devote my very first days in office to reversing these ideological, anti-science, anti-prevention policies that this administration has put into place."
   Mr. Obama, who was repeatedly interrupted by applause, said the recent Supreme Court decision upholding a federal ban on a type of abortion [the federal ban that was upheld by the Court was the ban on Partial Birth Abortion] is the beginning of a profound retreat on women’s rights, and should be presented that way to the voters.
   "We know that five men don’t know better than women and their doctors what’s best for women’s health," Mr. Obarna said, alluding to the 5-to-4 majority in the abortion case, Gonzales v. Carhart, which upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
   "We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children to have and when, without government interference, is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this county," he said.
  
   Mr. Obama’s speech – and the reception it received from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund – underscored the power of the Supreme Court as a galvanizing issue for Democratic primary voters, after a session marked by conservative shifts on abortion, school integration and other issues. But Mr. Obama also argued that supporters of the abortion rights should not shy from making their case to the broader public.

   "If the argument is narrow, oftentimes we lose," he said. "But if you ask everybody, you ask the most conservative person, do they want their daughters to have the same chances as men? Most of them will answer in the affirmative."

   Elizabeth Edwards, speaking on behalf of her husband, former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, said his commitment to abortion rights ran deep.
   "He hasn’t changed, he hasn’t wavered," she said, "John is pro-choice not because he made some political calculation. He simply is pro-choice.

   Mrs. Edwards argued that the nation was now "One Justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade," the 1973 Supreme Court decision recognizing a right to abortion.  She added that it was no time for the abortion-rights side to flinch.

   "There are times when compromise simply means capitulation, and this is one of those times," she said, "Just as you can’t be a little bit pregnant, you can’t be a little bit deprived of the right to control your body"……

 

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to “What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?”

  1. michigancatholic says:

    I’m still trying to figure out Obama. Mind you, I don’t mess in politics much anymore, having once been a card-carrying delegate for that party and getting an eyeful. Long time ago before my conversion….

    Is he a muslim or what? And if he is what is he doing favoring abortion? Is this just a bid to get elected or what?

    Doesn’t he know that Planned Parenthood is in the minority district for a reason? Or doesn’t he care?

    BTW, someone should inform madame clinton that birth control pills ARE the major health obstacle that many women face. They:
    a) are hormone preparations that are linked to cardiovascular disease, including blood clots and stroke. There is substantive research, however it’s resisted for political & economic reasons.
    b) usually contain at least 2 forms of hormone which may cause tumors and other abnormalities years down the road.
    c) work by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg (read child) into the lining of the uterus. It’s a form of infanticide. I shouldn’t have to remind people that killing their own kids is a mortal sin and at the very least ought to keep them out of the Holy Communion line til they go to confession.
    d) don’t prevent sexual diseases. In fact, they can create the impression that scaggy sexual behavior is free, among those so inclined.
    e) make women gain weight. Once overweight, women are 60-70% more likely to become pregnant while on the pill. No one wants to talk about the repercussions of that. It has been shown to increase the likelihood of complications in at least the mother. And recent research says it’s more likely to produce twinning.
    f) and last but not least, are *THE* FUNDAMENTAL WOMENS’ RIGHTS ISSUE. When a man (boyfriend, doctor, husband, boss) can tell a woman how many kids to have, whether her kids should live or die, and even–get this–even when her periods should fall, she is a slave being used for pleasure and profit.

    Sorry to be blunt, but that’s the truth.

  2. Jim says:

    I’m not strong on American politics, apart from being aware that we should all wonder why that lying b****d is lying to us. But your lot all seem as bad as one another.

    In the UK we have a representative democracy where we vote for MPs who then go and do as they please. And we have less chance than you of rolling back the tide of abortions, because of that.

  3. michigancatholic says:

    Women on the pill: The next time you say under your breath, “he doesn’t respect me,” you ask yourself why.

    /rant.

    Sorry Fr. but it has to be said when the subject of birth control comes up. It’s the truth.

  4. Tony says:

    Saint Micheal the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil, may God rebuke him we humbly pray and do thou O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God thrust into hell Satan and those other evil spirits who prowl about the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

  5. RBrown says:

    I’m still trying to figure out Obama. Mind you, I don’t mess in politics much anymore, having once been a card-carrying delegate for that party and getting an eyeful. Long time ago before my conversion….
    Comment by michigancatholic

    Obama’s no mystery. He’s simply a liberal.

  6. Larry says:

    I’m still trying to figure out Obama. Mind you, I don’t mess in politics much anymore, having once been a card-carrying delegate for that party and getting an eyeful. Long time ago before my conversion….

    Obama’s no mystery. He’s simply attempting to be elected by liberals.

    Just thought I’d fix that for ya…

    ;)

  7. RBrown says:

    Obama’s no mystery. He’s simply attempting to be elected by liberals.
    Just thought I’d fix that for ya…
    Comment by Larry

    I don’t disagree, but I think he really is a liberal.

  8. michigancatholic says:

    A liberal what?

  9. Ted says:

    “Mrs. Edwards argued that the nation was now ‘One Justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade,’ the 1973 Supreme Court decision recognizing a right to abortion. She added that it was no time for the abortion-rights side to flinch.”

    When a Supreme Court makes laws without the approval of the people, there is little justification in calling that country a demo-cracy; yet this is the type of activist court that is highly favoured by the Demo-crats. Ironically, such a court becomes the absolute “king” of the country, the way the kings of England were before the signing of the Magna Carta.

    It is also interesting that when the majority of society is not in favour of an action by some proponents in the minority, the word “rights” enters these discussions usually from the minority side. More attention must be given to this term, because its meaning has been shifting over the recent years. It has become to mean that license or freedom that a legal entity can extract from society and despite the society. On the one hand, it can mean that, say, an individual can act contrary to the wishes of the society as a whole; on the other it can mean that society owes to the individual a debt that the individual has managed to extract from that society. In current usage, “rights” is understood to be in opposition to society, that is to say, it deliberately igonores the common good and places the good of any individual above the common one, as the above article illustrates. The term “right” as it is generally used today should be challenged and exposed for what it has come to signify.

  10. dcs says:

    I think the Supreme Court is more like three justices away from overturning Roe v. Wade. Roberts and Alito did not join in Thomas’s concurring opinion (Scalia did join) “that the Court’s abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, . . . has no basis in the Constitution.” So the idea that the Court is only one justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade is just hysteria on the part of the liberals, and wishful thinking on the part of the conservatives.

  11. Henry Edwards says:

    Mrs. Edwards argued that the nation was now “One Justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade

    This “Mrs. Edwards” is not my wife, but I hope her assertion is correct, and that the result of the next election affords us that one additional Justice that is needed to end the holocaust.

  12. This is why I’m a Republican – now matter how bad the Republicans are at a given time, it doesn’t rise to this evil. It doesn’t even occur to Obama that a lot of the daughters he talks about never get born…Evil makes one mad, this is proof.

  13. Cassandra says:

    Don’t worry about Obama. It’s Nurse Ratched who has got the nomination sewn up, and the election too. Come 20. i. 2009, there will lots to worry about, e.g. reading this blog will be a crime, Fr. Z will be in the supermax for “hate speech”, and Industrial Strength Catholics will be freer in China or Saudi Arabia than in the USA.

  14. Timothy James says:

    Cassandra,
    I wouldnt be so pessimistic, there is still a good chance that a Republican will get in. We just have to pray that a republican like rudy giuliani doesn’t get the nomination, then we would have a lose-lose situation. Fred Thompson has yet to announce his bid or start a campaign, im still hopeful for him. Regardless, we need to continue to hope and pray for a pro-life candidate. Don’t throw down your spiritual arms so easily!
    Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis!

  15. Linus says:

    Don’t get too excited folks. Politics won’t save us.
    What is discouraging though is all the Catholics I know
    who will vote for any Democrate running. I live in a
    ” Catholic ” county and a Republican can’t get elected
    here for any office at any level. So if we get pro-
    death candidates, Catholics can take much of the blame.
    Just look at Massachusetes and New Jersy. I’d vote for
    Satan if he was pro-life.
    Another subject. Any one read A Memoriall of a
    Christian Life by Ven Louis of Granada? You can get the
    1975 edition through the Inerlibrary Loan System.There
    are supposed to be 60 copies in the country. I think it is
    better than the Sinner’s Guide. Let’s give a push to
    have it republished or better rewritten in modern English.

  16. Joe says:

    Yes but let us remember that during the current anti-abortion Administration, abortions have actually increased after declining during the Clinton years. Let us also remember that teen pregnancy is also up as are teen STD rates. Anyone can “think” what they are doing works, but the facts prove that it’s not working.

    If we want to decrease abortions we have to take care of our population and give women every opportunity to not make that decision.

    I also believe we need to face the fact that abortion will probably always be legal in this Country from now on, just like in Europe. Rather than wasting all this money protesting, perhaps we should incrase our focus on family and daycare programs to give women who feel like they have no ability to take care of a child… that ability.

    I hate abortion and would love to see it illegal yet I just don’t believe that will ever happen. If it does, it won’t stay that way for long. Remember that this is a secular nation, a Politician can’t force His / Her views on others, all they can do is to stand for them and lead with them. The tricky part is figuring out what actions will “actually” best achieve your goals.

    I’m not saying that any of the current canidates are correct in their stances, but I would ask that you listen rather than taking a few bold comments as your decision. What those bold comments may lead to, might just surprise you.

    Joe

  17. RBrown says:

    Yes but let us remember that during the current anti-abortion Administration, abortions have actually increased after declining during the Clinton years. Let us also remember that teen pregnancy is also up as are teen STD rates. Anyone can “think” what they are doing works, but the facts prove that it’s not working.

    No administration, not Bush not Clinton, has the authority to decrease abortions.

    If we want to decrease abortions we have to take care of our population and give women every opportunity to not make that decision. I also believe we need to face the fact that abortion will probably always be legal in this Country from now on, just like in Europe.

    The situation of abortion in Europe is not as simple as you seem to think.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6235557.stm

    Rather than wasting all this money protesting, perhaps we should incrase our focus on family and daycare programs to give women who feel like they have no ability to take care of a child… that ability.

    You are shooting yourself in the foot: Daycare programs undermine the family. Besides which, above you say the govt should stay out of it. Now you want the govt involved.

    I hate abortion and would love to see it illegal yet I just don’t believe that will ever happen. If it does, it won’t stay that way for long. Remember that this is a secular nation, a Politician can’t force His / Her views on others, all they can do is to stand for them and lead with them. The tricky part is figuring out what actions will “actually” best achieve your goals.

    If this is a secular nation and politicians can’t force their views on others, why does the Fed govt fund abortions? And why did the US stop slavery?

    The best that can happen in the US is to turn the matter back over to be settled by each state legislature.

  18. michigancatholic says:

    Ok, I’ll tell you what I’ve thought privately for a long time. Catholics have to “do a Mother Theresa.” We should put our money where our mouth is–by taking in kids, lots of kids. We need to offer to take the unwanted kids and save their lives, and raise them Catholic because it’s our motivation for doing so.

    We could show them what we’re really made of. Silently, carefully, pliantly and lovingly. Take em all in legally and give them life. Impossible to refute–even when the best constructed arguments are made.

    That’s the only way to beat this thing.