Posted on 07/22/2003 8:51:39 PM PDT by nickcarraway
My name is Joe O’Farrell, and this is my story. I have had an experience of conversion after working for a number of Democratic politicians.
The men I worked for were either indifferent to, or fully in support of the current US abortion laws and court decisions. As a Catholic, I found this increasingly hard to ignore and I have changed my career and opinion about the issue.
After leaving the Office of [Georgia] Governor Barnes, I spent most of 2000 working for the state and national presidential campaign of Vice President Al Gore. The process was something I enjoyed on many levels but it left me unable to face myself in the mirror.
While I have always been Pro-Life in my heart, I was not defending the issues of life in my work. The knowledge that I was turning my back on my God and the cause of justice was something that was always with me. Often I would make excuses and bury the emotions that were tearing me up inside.
In pursuing my career, I would consider the heights to which I would rise within the Gore administration and the good I would be able to accomplish when I arrived in Washington. I would point to the kind and good-intentioned volunteers that I would meet and think about how abortion was only one issue. I had many excuses and loopholes ready to counter the feelings of betrayal that I had in my heart.
I clung to the campaign, and the Democratic establishment that seemed to welcome me, as a way of belonging to something special and feeling like I was making a contribution to something important. I felt that what I was doing was excusable because I was not demonstrating in support of abortion. I would comment to people that I would never hand out the blue circular signs that said “Keep Abortion Legal”. I would speak of this to Catholic friends while I was really masking the shame of my cowardice and unwillingness to do more.
In August of 2000, I traveled to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. I was working as an advance aide to Sen. Lieberman and had access to everything. While in LA, I witnessed every type of protest and demonstration for and against causes close to people’s heart. The demonstrators that stand out most clearly in my mind are the Pro-Life protesters who carried and displayed very large graphic photos of the horror of killing unborn children. The images bring tears to my eyes even as I write this today. I remember these more than anything else from my time in Los Angeles.
While in Los Angeles, I attended a large party at the ranch of a Hollywood producer. The party was entitled “Hollywood Salutes President Clinton”. This was an event swimming in movie and TV stars with all the glamour of Hollywood. All I could think about was how cool my friends would think it was when I told them about it.
As I looked around and tried to embrace every little bit of the excitement, I felt unable to experience a real joy. I knew I was not at home and I knew this was not a place that would accept me or a world I could ever accept. I felt uneasy and unwelcome, though not for anything clearly understandable. I would shake off these feelings and think about how great it was that I was at such a party.
As the event concluded, we walked down to the bottom of the large driveway and I noticed a group of four or five Pro-Life protesters with the large photos across the street. They were standing silently, confined by the police. At first I winced in annoyance at the damper they were putting on the fun. Then I saw women bursting into tears and hiding their faces as their boyfriends led them away from the view. I too turned away and buried my emotions as I greeted an old friend from the ‘96 campaign.
As we walked on up the street toward our car I tried to feel positive about the experience of the night. I had been a guest at the best party the world could create. Every star imaginable was there. I had met the rich and famous of Hollywood and the music industry. Still, I couldn’t feel good or free from guilt; the tug of God and the knowledge that I was in a place far away from him was painful and desperate.
As we drove out of the area we again passed the protesters who were still on their small patch of grass across from the party. I was compelled to look and I caught the eye of a young blond girl, just a teenager, standing with the group, she looked straight into my eyes as our van passed by. I felt her saying to me in a soft voice. “What are you doing over there Joe? You belong with us”. I believe she was an angel sent to bring me back. I will carry the image of her in my mind forever.
This was all nearly three years ago and they’ve been difficult but blessed years. The events are obviously still fresh in my mind. I have returned to the church and my faith in a real way and I am actively involved in the parish at Christ the King. I will never work for a pro-choice candidate or administration again.
My bright political career has vanished for the moment and I struggle with questions of why opportunities with Vice President Gore were made available to me while others were not. I am not looking for my career to be the only thing of importance in my life any longer.
I don’t know what plan God has for me but I am learning to trust Him and I understand that the plan will be a good and beautiful one because it is His. If you are one of those who are brave enough to be true to God, know that people notice and hearts are changed and won back to God from your work. Even the smallest effort makes a difference.
Joe O'Farrell is now an IT professional working in Atlanta. He and his wife Kersti are active members of the Cathedral of Christ the King parish.
This article originally appeared in the Newsletter of Georgia Right to Life and is adapted by permission.
I'm still "pro-choice." I just happen to believe the choice should be made before having sex.
If someone doesn't want children, they shouldn't engage in activity that nature designed to produce children.
-Jay
This does appear to be a contradiction on its face, but there is a common undercurrent in the Liberal's abortion and capital punishment stance:
Both seek to keep people from accepting ultimate responsibility for their actions.
Upon noting that, all apparently dichotomous conduct by the Liberals make sense. Liberals don't believe anyone -- not terrorists, not criminals, not those who abort their children -- should be held accountable for crimes and errors. (Hell, from what I see, the only people the Liberals ever want to punish are Conservatives.)
-Jay
An interesting note:
My bright political career has vanished for the moment and I struggle with questions of why opportunities with Vice President Gore were made available to me while others were not.
I would surmise that the Gore opportunities arose so that Joe could immerse himself in the dark side, and thereby see it for what it is, and have his heart change.
Often for us hard-headed types, we need to make some mistakes in order to be knocked in the head with the truth.
by Dan Coyne
During the Great Irish Potato Famine in the mid-1800's, anti-Catholic zealots would occasionally bring large kettles of soup to Irish villages. The soup was free, but there was a catch. Before a starving Irishman could have even a sip of the soup, he would first have to renounce his Catholic faith.
So strong was the Catholic faith in Ireland at the time that many starved to death rather than selling their souls. However, a few did drink the soup. They became known as "soupers" -- a derisive label that would stick to their families for generations.
Today, we are witnessing a similar real-life morality play. Only this one doesn't involve Irish farmers starving for food. This one involves ambitious politicians starving for power. The soup these politicians are being asked to drink is a concoction brewed up by the radical feminists and abortion profiteers who now control the Democratic Party. The reward for drinking this soup of death is the right to run for president as a Democrat.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Teddy Kennedy was among those first in line for a taste of the soup. In a 1971 letter, the then pro-life Teddy Kennedy wrote, "The legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old." By 1980, Teddy had sipped the soup and was running for President as an outspoken supporter of abortion.
Likewise Jesse Jackson, before deciding to run for president, called abortion "black genocide." In 1977, Jackson wrote an article for National Right to Life News that said: "It takes three to make a baby: a man, a woman and the Holy Spirit. What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience? What kind of a person and what kind of a society will we have 20 years hence if life can be taken so casually?" By 1988, Jackson had also sipped the soup and was running for President as an outspoken supporter of abortion.
Al Gore and Dick Gephardt are two more former pro-lifers who indulged in the soup and discarded their support for the unborn in preparation for a run for the presidency. And of course, few have gulped down the soup of death with the gusto of Bill Clinton, a man well known for his insatiable appetites. In a 1986 letter to Arkansas Right to Life, Clinton wrote: "I am opposed to abortion and to government funding of abortions. We should not spend state funds on abortions because so many people believe abortion is wrong." As we all know, Clinton went on to become the most radically pro-abortion President in our nation's history.
56-year-old Congressman Dennis Kucinich appears to be the latest addition to the Democratic Souper Club. Over a long political career, Kucinich maintained a near perfect pro-life voting record. As recently as last May, Kucinich press secretary, Kathie Scarrah, stated: "He absolutely believes in the sanctity of life and that life begins at conception." Then Kucinich began to think about running for President. It was time for some soup.
Less than a week after announcing his decision to explore the possibility of running for president, Kucinich wrote a letter to his local newspaper, The Cleveland Plain Dealer, wherein he publicly renounced his long held pro-life position: "I don't believe in abortion; few do. I do, however, believe in choice." In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Kucinich goes even further; not ruling out his support for publicly funded free abortions for poor women. "I am going to continue to take a thoughtful approach, and that doesn't preclude the poor from having the government support their right to choose." Amazingly, Kucinich has been trying to make the argument that his position on this fundamental issue has not really changed. "The position I'm taking now is an expansion; it's not a reversal," Kucinich told Tim Russert on Meet the Press.
So let's get this straight. Less than a year ago, Kucinich believed that life begins at conception and that this unborn life is sacred. Now that he is running for president, Kucinich believes that the 51% of Americans who believe that abortion is homicide should be compelled to pay for free abortions for poor women. So much for "choice," Americans, you are going to pay for other people's free abortions even if you think they are committing homicide.
To confound matters further, Kucinich also says he wants to promote policies that will reduce the number of abortions. But of course, free abortions for poor women are not going to decrease the number of abortions. What's next? Free cigarettes for the poor in an effort to reduce smoking? In truth, if Kucinich seriously wanted to promote life while leaving Roe v Wade in place, there is much that could be done. Indeed, what would be necessary is a government funded educational campaign unprecedented in size and scope.
This campaign would use the latest and best medical evidence and technological advancements to call for tolerance, compassion, and mercy toward the least of our brothers and sisters, the unborn. Focused on fetology and the humanity of the unborn, such a campaign would include public service announcements on television and radio as well as billboards throughout the country with a particular focus on inner city neighborhoods where the abortion rate is at epidemic proportions. This information would also be brought into classrooms across the country.
We know that up to ninety percent of women considering abortion choose life if they are permitted to view the child on an ultrasound. Bring these ultrasound videos into our public schools and make our unborn children the stars of scientific and factual public service announcements.
An ambitious public education campaign focused on the humanity of the unborn child is the least we should expect from a committed progressive like Kucinich, who has not yet renounced his belief that life begins at conception. But sadly, Kucinich is no longer permitted to promote life. Instead, he strictly abides by Democratic protocol and uses the callous euphemism "choice" to describe the mass destruction of what he believes to be sacred human lives. He has suddenly and not unexpectedly stopped mentioning that life is sacred and begins at conception.
There will come a day in history when our society as a whole awakens and unanimously recognizes the horror of abortion. When that day comes, historians will look back at our time trying to figure out how such a national tragedy could have occurred. These historians will read our newspapers, pour over our correspondence, view our news programs, and examine our voting records. And just as today's historians look back at Nazi Germany concerned solely as to whether or not individuals bravely fought for life or silently consented to a regime of death, historians in the future will be solely concerned with whether or not we spoke up for our unborn brothers and sisters or silently consented to a Culture of Death.
As life-affirming generations in the future look back at us, few will be treated more harshly than the modern soupers. Highly educated, outspoken, and passionate, they could have made a difference. They knew the truth. And, for a short time, they were willing to speak out for the unborn. But then the price got too high. They became cowards. Starved for power, they each drank the soup of death. May God have mercy on their souls.
To witness, perhaps? Just a thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.