Free Republic

JSDude1: “This guy seems to be a genuine Conservative, unlike many who pass themselves out as such these days..

I think I’ll donate to his campaign as I went to College in Virginia (Normal Virgina-AKA the mountainous midsection).”

Yes, he’s good. REALLY pro-life. He also fought and continues fighting the abusive driver fines that got everyone so upset. Virginians can get fined thousands for mere traffic infringements. Even the liberal local press is looking forward to him against Gilmore because Marshall’s got personality. Please rally your friends in the commonwealth.

Amen, JSDude1.

Deacon Fournier is longwinded, but he got the fundamental point right. I think he’s frustrated that so many public Catholics are endorsing ESCR candidates despite the fact that the Catholic Church has been unfailing in its defense of innocent persons.

First, we had Paul Weyrich, Laura Ingraham and Sen. Rick Santorum endorsing Gov. Romney, Mr. Embryonic Stem Cell Research.

Now we have “no exceptions” Sen. Brownback making exceptions for McCain. Gov. Frank Keating and Austin Ruse of C-FAM are also among the bogus group Catholics for McCain. There are others too, I just can’t recall the list this split second.

However, in the U.S. Senate’s record on S. 5, the
proposal to fund embryonic stem cell research with our tax dollars, McCain voted for it:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?

We know that Congress will pass that evil bill again, but McCain would not veto it like President Bush did. Yet both Presidents Bush are telling us that McCain is a true conservative and pro-life.

So, what the hell? Why are some public Catholics selling out? Church doctrine says that if we are offered 2 anti-life candidates, we may choose the better between them. But we are not allowed to endorse or campaign for McCain or any other ESCR, euthanasia or abortion candidate.

I feel betrayed by Catholics for McCain. Paul Weyrich did come to his senses and he’s now endorsing Huckabee.

In honor of JSDude1, a little Scripture:
Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.”
Matthew 16:24-27

“Do not the Catholic Priest in America preach their faith? Then what is the difference?? I really want to know what they did that was different. 90% is a big change, so I think there is a lot more to the story and the story needs to come out to defeat abortion in other countries.

General platitudes may be at the base of it, but the success must be propagated.”

Hey sr4402, there is nothing platitudenous about supposing the priests live and preach their faith.

God doesn’t ask much. He asks to obey the commandments and love one another as we love ourselves. There’s nothing shallow about that. If a priest is faithful and holy, he can change many lives. Most likely, they are teaching pro-life reality too.

Like I said, O’Brien seems to get it. Read his part of the interview again.

Oops, that’s principle of double effect ;-I

Lucius Cornelius Sulla says, “Clearly they also support it if the life of the mother is severely endangered, which is the Catholic Church position.”

Lucius, you are mistaken. The Church supports abortion in no case. Here are some sections from the Cathechism:

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.”

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

---

In short, Catholic moral theology says that a physcian or healthcare worker should try to presevre both mother and child. However, if the child dies due to some uncontrollable circumstance, we understand this as the principal of double effect, so the attending physcian/healthcare worker isn’t guilty of murder.

sr4402 asks, “Please, what exactly did the Bishops say or do that turned the situation around?”

Apparently, they and other priests lived and preached their faith. I like O’Brien’s analysis. It seems wherever Catholics are persecuted, the faith is considered precious and numerous men answer to religious vocations. Mother Teresa said that in the USA we suffer spiritual poverty. She was right. So, to Catholics and non-Catholics alike, let’s pray for all people to know truth and respond accordingly - all for the greater glory of God.

Merry Christmas!

Calling all bishops ... just imagine what would happen in America if ALL Catholic bishops led the pro-life cause!

Mark wrote: “What is “Personhood?” a politically corect non-gender specific way to avoid the “man” part of the word “human”? Folks who let the enemey define it’s terms have lost haff the battle.

An individual human life begins at conception, as the flame of life is passed into him.”

Snuffing out the flame as a lifestyle choice, is wrong.

I support what they are trying to do, I just don’t like the term “Personhood””

The term “personhood” or “person” is not PC. It comes from pagan and Christian metaphysics. A person is defined by the powers of reason and will. Three kinds of beings are persons: God, angels and humans. Furthermore, if a person has Down syndrome (which can and usually does limit his/her rational powers), he/she is still a person. The limitation of his/her powers is not essential, it is accidental, like race or hair color.

The statement by someone else that “life is a continuum, but personhood is not” is false. Our nature is eternal. Eternity, whether it ends up being heaven or hell, is granted only to persons (God, angels, human beings). So the continuum of eternity is predicated on one’s nature, i.e., personhood.

“In Italy, IVF is carried out by fertilizing and implanting one egg, and repeating as necessary.”

We’re not talking about chickens here. These are not fertilzed eggs, they are human embryos which are human persons.

I saw it. Bad writing and acting. If that's not enough, the story pissed me off because it seems anti-Christ and anti-Catholic.

Thomson is one of the researchers who developed the new method in the opening praragraph, but he's an embryonic researcher too. He's pushing for our tax dollars to fund ESCR.

dangus says: “No, Jill doesn’t know what the hell she is talking about, and apparently has never read a single bloody thing about Abraham Lincoln or Steven Douglas.

Lincoln absolutely took a State’s-Rights view on slavery; it’s only a bunch of confederate hicks trying to justify their ancestors’ treachery and abominations that say otherwise. But Lincoln and the Confederate slave-holders both knew that the plantation system would be doomed if decent, Christian Americans ever took a very deep look at the institution of slavery.

Thompson’s answers are nearly Lincoln’s verbatim. And I suspect that’s by design.”

Hmm. I’d like to see that Lincoln/Thompson parallel dialog. By Fred’s logic, Abe should’ve kept the Emancipation Proclamation to himself.

It’s valid to fight on all fronts; the states, federal legislation and the courts. How about a presidential emancipation proclamation for the unborn? Robert George hinted at that: http://www.clmagazine.org/backissues/2006janfeb_14-17notimetolose.pdf

Jill nailed it.

“Perhaps that’s why my Pro-Choice Liberal Democrat friend is so supportive of him. He doesn’t seem to care about the Constitution or Federalism.

By his (il)logic, why isn’t all murder a Federal crime?

Does he really not understand the American system, or does he just not care?”

A human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution declaring personhood from fertilization until natural death doesn’t violate states’ rights since it would be in line with the 14th Amendment. Huckabee is right on this point; he upholds the RNC platform and goal too.

He did, however, miss the problem with the SCOTUS decision on partial birth abortion. The court upheld the ban (which isn’t really a ban because it has exceptions) and Kennedy instructs abortionists how to get around the ban with other diabolical methods.

BritExPatInFla wrote, “’Brain Dead’ was a stupid and inaccurate phrase to use. Persistent Vegitative State is a much better description of what this poor shell of a woman was at the time she was finally allowed to rest in peace.”

Terri was neither brain dead nor PVS. It is metaphysically impossible for human beings to become vegetables. Like the rest of us, no matter what her abilities or disabilities, Terri was and is in a persistent human state, she is persistently a human being. Before she was killed, doctors diagnosed her mental powers as MCS, i.e., in a minimally conscious state.

“Except for the fact that you neglected Alan Keyes as the most solid pro-life choice of all.

He was the only candidate standing with our friends in CO who are working for the Personhood Amendment. Did you notice?”

Indeed I did, EV. Sorry, I forgot about that.