Catholics on social issues in Minnesota

As I have written before, during the 2012 election run-up Minnesota will be a battle-ground state for the defense of marriage issue.  The Catholic bishops of Minnesota will be deeply involved.  Archbishop Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has all but nailed their colors to the mast… and well he should.  There is a state amendment up for a vote in Minnesota.  Money from everywhere will pour into Minnesota in order to corrupt the definition of marriage.  The Catholic bishops have taken a stand and they will fight to the end.

I don’t think there is a connection between my comments above, on the Catholic bishops, and then this next item, on another important social issue.

I noted with interest that a Catholic pro-life DEMOCRAT candidate is going to run for Minn.-5.  Did you get that?  A pro-life dem?

Catholic Pro-Lifer to Challenge Muslim Congressman Ellison in Minnesota Primary

Contact: David Lewis, 202-531-7547,; [Be aware that at that site there are horrible photos of aborted babies.  FYI.]

MINNEAPOLIS, Oct. 24, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ — On Monday, October 24, 10:00 A.M., Catholic Pro-lifer Gary Boisclair will announce primary against incumbent Keith Ellison, District 5. Boisclair (Biography below) will challenge Mr. Ellison in a Democrat (DFL) primary to Represent Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District.

Location: U.S. District Court, Plaza, 300 South 4th Street, Minneapolis, MN

Time: 10:00 A.M.

Gary Boisclair states:

“I intend to defeat Mr. Ellison soundly in this primary, based upon the issues at hand. Congressman Keith Ellison has failed to represent the ethics and beliefs of this district.

“At the onset of his tenure, Ellison took his Oath of office with his hand on a Quran – a book which mandates violence against Jews and Christians.

“Ellison consistently legislates for socialist programs, which in effect make us the slave labor force of the federal government. Under his agenda, we are enslaved to heavy taxation, crushing debt, runaway inflation, and we are forced to ‘give’ our hard earned money to his favorite ‘entitlements.’ [Not only democrat and pro-life, but also a Tea Partier? This after that PCJP “white paper” today.  My head is starting to spin.]

[NB] “But Mr. Ellison’s track record is even more nefarious. [What is this? Tolkien?  I guess Mr. Boisclair isn’t into mincing words!  But wait! There’s more… ] Mr. Ellison has voted repeatedly to fund Planned Parenthood, a racist organization with a long history of discrimination against minorities, which has consistently targeted black and Hispanic minorities for the abortion of their children. Planned Parenthood is a racist, criminal syndicate, which covers up the crimes of pedophiles, rapists and sex traffickers; it slaughters nearly 1,000 unborn babies every day, and Keith Ellison is their brazen champion, as he hypocritically parades his Progressive Caucus motto, “Liberty and Justice for ALL.” (caps brought to you by Rep. Ellison)

I urge all DFLers to put their most sacred beliefs about God, ethics, and human life first in this election, and to vote for a candidate who truly represents those beliefs.”

Mr. Boisclair will unveil his first three TV ads on Monday, October 24th, at

What I find fascinating about this is that Mr. Boisclair is running in the DFL primary.  A pro-life Democrat who speaks in these terms?

A war is going to flare up in Minnesota over social issues.  The Catholic bishops are going to have a strong voice in the public square.  However, it seems that some other Catholics are stepping into another aspect of the public square and challenging the status quo of the dem’s plaftform.

Again, I don’t think the Catholic bishops of Minnesota are connected to this fellow running for MN-5.  What I find interesting is that there is a stronger Catholic voice being expressed in Minnesota than has been heard for a very long time.  It is fascinating to me that this challenge to the incumbent in MN-5 should come from within the DFL.  Rara avis.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. KAS says:

    WOW, if this person actually votes those terms and isn’t lying, then I would be delighted to vote for him!! As things are going now families are going to be taxed into being unable to feed their children.

    Like very much what this person says– will look forward to seeing if he does it too. It seems that so often though a person runs on this sort of platform but once they get into office they morph into just another pro-culture of death Democrat or a RINO type and the people have to vote them back out in the hopes of finding better representatives.

  2. jilly4ski says:

    Well you know, MN district 6 hasn’t been able to vote a democrat into office for many years. Patty Wetterling, who is pro-choice (despite having her son kidnapped and presumably murdered), is the DFL choice up there, but she keeps getting defeated despite the farmers loyalty to the farmer-labor party. I know in Sterns County, all (or most) the local government candidates are pro life, because if you are not, you do not get elected.

  3. Randall Terry is behind this candidate, unfortunately. Gary is a good man, who I have known personally for years, but I’m very sad to see him associate himself with Mr. Terry.

    Mr. Terry, as you might be aware, has a reputation for creating media circuses with the express (and sole) purpose of creating firestorms of controversy.

    He tends to discredit the pro-life cause wherever he goes:

    If I were a rep of Planned Parenthood, I’d be very happy to see Mr. Terry in the public square.
    He manipulates people and situations, is a divisive figure in the pro-life movement, and is a shameless self-promoter. When I met him yesterday, he called himself “probably the most important pro-life figure since Mother Teresa.”

    Exhibit A:

    Exhibit B (with Gary on the right):

    Please pray that Mr. Terry has a change of heart in regard to his tactics.

  4. jasoncpetty says:

    Would to God we could find some pro-life Democrats all over this country, especially at the federal level. Start giving enough elections to pro-life Democrats and maybe Republicans will be forced actually to do something about abortion other than use it as a carrot on a stick to hold in front of the socially conservative base to keep riding that donkey (elephant?) to victory each year.

  5. ckdexterhaven says:

    Sorry, but the Obamacare vote proved once and for all: there is no such thing as a pro life democrat. Doesn’t exist. Bart Stupak lied all the way to the abortuary with his claim of 19 brave democrat pro-lifers willing to stand up for unborn babies. Stupak and his 19 “pro life” democrats were never going to vote against federally funded abortion. The democrat party wouldn’t even let pro life governor Casey speak at the national convention in 96. Please. The democrat party funnels millions to Planned (un)Parenthood and verse visa. If Mr. Boisclais is so prolife why is he affiliated with the Democrat party? Not buying it.

  6. XYZ321 says:

    I live in District 5, and I feel like I am the only Republican in that District. If Mr. Boisclais is pro-life and elected, then I would have a congressman who agrees with me on at least one issue. I don’t think there is a single issue of which Congressman Ellison and I agree. Unfortunately, Congressman Ellison has the advantage of being an incumbent, and based on that fact, I believe he will hold the office until he gives it up.

  7. Legisperitus says:

    Any real pro-life Democrats (more likely to exist at the state level than the federal) should be supported. As long as one major party remains dogmatically pro-death, the other party will consider pro-life voters as “in the bag” and will be less likely to take serious action after elections.

  8. randomcatholic says:


    I am pro-life. 100%. I have prayed in front of abortion clinics. I have marched in the March for Life in Washington, and I have even undergone some soft persecution for my faith. I am a union member, and I am pro-union. I can’t stand Austrian economics…. I think is pseudo-intellectual balderdash, and I am a DEMOCRAT. I haven’t voted for a Democrat in a long time at the national level, because I will NOT vote for pro-death candidates. But I am here. I am real. And I am no phony. An apology from you would be appreciated. I am offended by these attacks on me by right-wing cafeteria Catholics who on the one hand promote the Latin Mass, but on the other attack the Pope for issuing Caritas in Veritate. As far as I am concerned, the cafeteria line is WIDE OPEN in both directions.

  9. ckdexterhaven says:

    Ok random. Uhhh I think you can search the archives here, and I don’t think I’ve ever promoted the Latin Mass and I know I’ve never attacked any pope, ever. So no apology here. I should have said, there is no such thing as an ELECTED pro-life democrat. They might be pro-life B.E. (Before Election), but the national party tells them when/how to vote, and as the Obamacare vote showed, federal funding of abortions trumps protecting unborn babies.

  10. randomcatholic says:

    You are wrong. There are several pro-life elected democrats at the state and national level. Many of them have done brave work. Furthermore, the way some right-wing pro-life organizations treated national pro-life dems in the recent health-care debate was pretty disingenuous. I mean, the SBC list failed to have a libel lawsuit thrown out against it by Steve Driehaus. Hard to do when dealing with a public official. Now there are few national pro-life dems. They were creamed in the last election. Few could survive the amount of vitriol that flew around them. Bart Stupak probably had more death threats that year than any elected official (from BOTH sides of the debate)

    Furthermore, you clearly said that there is “no such thing as a pro-life democrat.” In this you were mistaken. I am one. Second, you are further mistaken when you say that there is no such thing as an elected pro-life democrat. So, I am awaiting that apology. I support the Latin Mass vehemently. I love tradition, and the Church’s traditional teachings, including those teachings that come from our social encyclicals.

  11. FYI – Gary’s campaign is a Randall Terry initiative.

    Mr. Terry, as you might be aware, has a reputation for creating media circuses with the express purpose of creating firestorms of controversy.

    Unfortunately, he has a history of discrediting the pro-life cause he is championing:

    Exhibit A -Randall Terry Stabs Babies

    Exhibit B (with Gary on the right) – Quran Tearing Training for Oct. 7 with Randall Terry:

    His philosophy of political activism is available here:

  12. NoraLee9 says:

    Another pro-life, pro-union democrat here. Sort of. I am registered with the “pro-life” party, but would never vote for a republican. I live in NYC, though, so…. Times are tough on us pro-life dems, all 18 of us. I am used to being pillioried. As for this Minnesota politician- if he can’t win there, he should come here. Maybe he could run for president. He gets my vote.

  13. ckdexterhaven says:

    random catholic-let’s have names of pro life elected democrats. Bart Stupak and his gang voted for Obamacare which supported federal funding of abortion. Just last week, Nancy Pelosi said this from the floor of the House “Republicans want women to die on the floor.” What was Nancy so upset about? The Protect Life Amendment brought to the floor by (ahem) Republicans, the Protect Life Amendment aims to ensure that no funds authorized or appropriated by Obamacare may be used to pay for abortion or abortion coverage and also reinstates conscience protections for pro-life medical workers.

    When the democrats controlled the House,*Every* and I do mean every, “pro life democrat” , voted for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker. Nancy Pelosi has a 100% NARAL rating.

    There is no such thing as an (elected) pro life democrat. No.such.thing.

  14. Supertradmum says:

    All the dems on this blog, please answer me this question? How can you support a party, which consistently supports Roe v. Wade in its formal platform year after year? “We will defend the dignity of all Americans against those who would undermine it. Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman’s right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption
    incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” Do you honestly want to belong to a group like this? 2004 Democratic Party Platform.

    And the 2008 Platform was worse: “Dana Goldstein calls the 2008 Democratic National Platform draft (PDF) a “remarkably feminist document” and goes on to say:

    Some conservatives are interpreting the platform’s mention of adoption and a woman’s right to choose motherhood as a new attempt to reach out to mixed and anti-choice Evangelical and Catholic voters. But I also think the platform is a significant victory for reproductive rights advocates. The Clintonian formula of “safe, legal, and rare” has been scrubbed. The adoption stuff is hardly new. And both the 2004 and 2008 platforms, with their “regardless of her ability to pay” language, oppose the Hyde Amendment, which currently prevents Medicare and Medicaid from paying for abortions.”

  15. Supertradmum says:

    Dana Goldstein calls the 2008 Democratic National Platform draft (PDF) a “remarkably feminist document” and goes on to say:

    Some conservatives are interpreting the platform’s mention of adoption and a woman’s right to choose motherhood as a new attempt to reach out to mixed and anti-choice Evangelical and Catholic voters. But I also think the platform is a significant victory for reproductive rights advocates. The Clintonian formula of “safe, legal, and rare” has been scrubbed. The adoption stuff is hardly new. And both the 2004 and 2008 platforms, with their “regardless of her ability to pay” language, oppose the Hyde Amendment, which currently prevents Medicare and Medicaid from paying for abortions.”

    Answer me one question, Dems on this blog? How can you support this Platform which is your party’s formal statement?

  16. PostCatholic says:

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more vituperative statement from a candidate for high office. On grounds of character, I couldn’t support such a person even if I did agree with his positions.

  17. randomcatholic says:

    Supertradmum: I for one do not support the Democratic party’s new platform. I have been involved in the past, and increasingly I am less so. Despite the rhetoric from the right saying the party is in the pocket of the unions, the labor movement is really suffering in the democratic party, and has no real say on anything. When I bring up things like “the family wage” and “the ability of a man to support a family” and “collective bargaining rights” and “due process for workers” and “ending international trade with countries that do not guarantee collective bargaining and political rights to their citizens” I am met with blank stares (even here at the small and insignificant local level). It is as if the traditional stances of the Democratic party do not even matter. I even had one person tell me: “that stuff is over. Unions are unnecessary. The market is fine. We are much more concerned with securing a woman’s right to choose and marriage rights for all.” Even look at Obama. That guy just signed free trade agreements with COLUMBIA AND PANAMA. How successful you think we have been at organizing workers in COLUMBIA AND PANAMA. Its absolutely shameful. Obama is as much a corporate oligarch as Bush was…. worse because at least Bush was a true believer in conservative economics.

    But I could never be a republican. Never. I may vote for republican presidential candidates, because the only other solution is not to vote (won’t vote pro-death). But how could I agree with a platform that is lukewarm on life issues, and stomps all over the Church’s traditional stances on social teaching? You ask Dems on this blog how we can support our parties formal statement. I do NOT support it. I ask Repubs on this blog: how can you support your party’s economic stances on things such as collective bargaining, the rights of labor, and a host of other issues, given the contents of Papal Encyclicals like Rerum Novarum?

  18. Cosmos says:

    It is not even a tiny bit surprising that there are so many pro-life democrats out there. A generation ago, most Catholics were democrats and the Democratic social and economic policy has echoes of catholic social teaching. However, if you do consider abortion as an essential issue, you are simply ignoring the reality of politics to vote for a pro-life democrat at this point. In small numbers pro-life democrats have little, if any, effect on policy, and simply allow the will of the majority to be done. For example, Stupac’s presence in the party had no effect on the president’s nomination of committed, pro-choice justices (Sotamayor or Kagan) and the “compromise” he achieved in the health care bill proved hollow.

  19. Supertradmum says:


    Thanks for answering in such a good and thoughtful manner. As I have been in teaching most of my adult life, I have a great abhorrence of teacher’s unions and other unions, which have sapped the energy of the markets, especially regarding private education and small businesses. The newspaper of both the American Teacher’s Union and the Transport Union, I do not have the exact names, but I have seen the papers in the past eight months, are full of blatantly Communist and Marxist language and symbols. In addition, pro-homosexual and the entire LGBT agenda are supported by these unions.Unions have done more damage to Iowa and Wisconsin politics than not. I worked in Catholic institutions for years for one-sixth the salary of most teachers and without cushy pension plans. Yet, these people whine constantly. If you have not seen the literature, check it out. It is revolutionary and anti-capitalistic. Catholics cannot believe in socialism, and the unions push for that.

    I am not defending the Republicans by stating that the unions and the far-left agenda of the Democratic Party have left no room for Christian involvement.

  20. Supertradmum says:

    The pro-death platform is not new. The detailed support of Roe v. Wade has been in the platform since at least late 1999, as in January, 2000, I went to the Republican Caucus in Iowa as the representative for Alan Keyes after giving up on the Dems. Catholic Dems have had at least eleven years to try and overthrow this death platform and have not. Why not? Because too many of the Catholic Dems are not pro-life. I watched the entire, days long debate on the Health Bill and Stupak had all the cards in his hand and caved in. His horrible, despicable decision (and I watched it all, all the details) is the history of pro-life Dems. They cave.

  21. randomcatholic says:

    Well…. I am not a national politician. Heck, I’m not even a local politician. I am just a voter now, and I know where I stand. I will not vote for pro-choice candidates. But I point out there are LOTS of folks on the Catholic right who hate papal encyclicals they disagree with just as much as liberals hate Humane Vitae. I can name a bunch of SCANDALOUS examples. But the reality is, there is a hierarchy of issues, and the issue of abortion is of the utmost importance. So people like me are disenfranchised given the current party system.

    I still support this organization. I would hope that all people of good will, regardless of political affiliation, would:

    I am pro-life. I may not be a registered democrat anymore, but I am still a union supporter and lab or rights activist to my core. I find nothing inconsistent in my positions.

  22. bookworm says:

    “Let’s have names of pro-life Democrats”

    OK, here you go: Rep. Dan Lipinski, D-IL, who voted against the final version of Obamacare, and specifically cited his pro-life convictions as the reason behind his vote.

  23. AnAmericanMother says:

    I think you need to distinguish between the traditional trades union and public sector unions.
    The latter make no economic sense because the “employer” is not footing the bill. The taxpayers are.
    Collusion and corruption are therefore inevitable.
    The union leadership takes the members’ dues, which come from the taxpayers, and bribes the ostensible employers (the elected officials) with campaign contributions (i.e. taxpayer money) to increase the salaries and benefits for the members (i.e. more taxpayer money). All of this is a distraction from the supposed job of the members, whether that is paving streets or teaching kids.
    This is the root cause of the incompetence and corruption supertradmum has observed.

  24. AnAmericanMother says:

    Sorry, I forgot to add that the reason the Dems are not paying attention to you is that trades union membership is way down. Public sector union membership is the only union demographic that’s increasing.
    People who support killing babies aren’t really interested in moral issues, except as those promote the acquisition of power. Why care about something as inconsequential as a ‘family wage’ when you’re busy killing off the most helpless of family members?

Comments are closed.