Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Getting out the Vote

The election is next week. Now more than ever we must remind those who who believe in life, who believe in protecting women and children, and who believe in the rule of law, to vote pro-life and only pro-life. That means voting for George W. Bush for president of the United states.

George W. Bush will continue to offer ways for us in the pro-life community to protect women and children.

Let me give you one example that affects the international situation. When Bill Clinton was president, planned parenthood and its ilk had access to the White House. Clinton reversed the Mexico City Policy and millions of your tax dollars were spent to promote pro-abortion and anti-family policies throughout the globe. Planned Parenthood injected itself into the domestic politics of other nations to promote legalization of abortion.

When George W. Bush was elected president, he reversed the Clinton pro-abortion policy and stopped the use of your tax dollars for these deadly purposes. He reinstated the Mexico City policy and now supports programs that promote family life, promote respect for women throughout the world and encourage education and understanding of family related issues.

There is also another even more critical reason for the re-election of George W. Bush. The next president will have the opportunity to nominate as many as four Supreme court justices to the nation's highest court. Who do you want selecting justices to rule on issues such as abortion, marriage and the first and second amendments?

Do you want someone who favors killing unborn children, who favors homosexual marriage or civil unions, who tried to stop the story on events that took place in Viet-Nam?

John Kerry will nominate liberal pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-second amendment judges.

John Kerrry supports keeping Roe v. Wade the law of the land. At the same time he tells people he is "personally" opposed to abortion. (Where do I make the sarcastic remark) His hypocrisy is revealing. He will say anything to anyone to get their vote. He has no substance. He is in a sense not unlike the character in the manchurian candidate.

Anyone who argues that he or she is against abortion and still intends to vote for Kerry is a turncoat to the cause and betrays the trust the children have in those who claim to be pro-life.

It is not a matter of religion. It is a matter of recognizing life as it is and remembering that life matters.

Monday, October 11, 2004

The passing of Christopher Reeve

For many Christopher Reeve is etched in our collective memories as Superman, the man of steel. The tragic accident reminded all of us of the strange twists in life and yet his courageous efforts to continue to live life to the fullest were applauded by all around him. Yet as in the case of Michael J. Fox, celebrities can be exploited by those with very different agendas. Their ability to misrepresent the facts, helped by willing conspirator in the press and media, only serve to defame the heroic and sacrificial efforts by those in the disabled community and their families to live full and generous lives.

Given that situation, the passing of Christopher Reeve should give us all pause to reflect on the nature of ones life, its purpose and the notion that each of us is called to be a 'gift' to our families, our friends, our community.

I quote below the words of Austin Ruse, Culture of Life president. They are most appropriate.

"Today we mourn the passing of the great entertainer Christopher Reeve. Our sincere condolences go to his brave family and friends who supported him through his long years of struggle."

"We regret that his passing, like that of Ronald Reagan, will provide the opportunity for some to make the false case for embryo-destructive research."

"The fact is that after twenty years and many millions of dollars, embryo-destructive research has not successfully treated a single patient or a single disease. Embryo-destructive research was no where close to helping Mr. Reeve walk again. To suggest otherwise does a disservice to those who suffer by raising profoundly false expectations that will not be realized."

"While embryo-destructive research has cured no person and no disease, adult stem cell research has already treated thousands of patients and more than 100 diseases. In fact, adult stem cell therapy has already helped those with severe spinal cord injuries to walk again, two of whom testified before the US Senate last month. One of those who testified even suffered from quadriplegic just like Christopher Reeve."

"Embryo-destructive research is morally problematic because it kills a human embryo in the process. On the other hand, adult stem cell research poses no such moral dilemma. Polls also show that a majority of Americans prefer research that does not kill the human embryo."

Ruse reminds us that the American people are not supportive of anything that kills innocent human life.

Each of us was created for a unique purpose, known initially by God, and hopefully discovered by us during our lives. Respect for that purpose and the willingness to help others discover that purpose is the noble effort of man. This noble purpose must be supported by our laws and the leaders who enforces the laws.

It all starts with respect for the human person and the tiniest of people - the pre-born child. I remember an old children's story, "Horton Hears a Who" by Dr. Seuss. In it there is a saying we must never forget. "A person's a person, no matter how small."

On November 2, 2004, remember that person when you vote. Cast your vote only for those candidates who will remember to protect and defend the smallest members of our human family - the pre-born children. Vote Pro-Life.

Kerry Disconnect

In the debate on October 8, 2004, John Kerry was asked this question:

DEGENHART: Senator Kerry, suppose you are speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person?

Kerry then answered the question this way. Examine in his answer whether he actually answers the question and then try to figure out what he is telling this person and indirectly you and me.

KERRY: I would say to that person exactly what I will say to you right now.

First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today.

But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that.

But I can counsel people. I can talk reasonably about life and about responsibility. I can talk to people, as my wife Teresa does, about making other choices, and about abstinence, and about all these other things that we ought to do as a responsible society.

KERRY: But as a president, I have to represent all the people in the nation. And I have to make that judgment.

Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise.

That's why I think it's important. That's why I think it's important for the United States, for instance, not to have this rigid ideological restriction on helping families around the world to be able to make a smart decision about family planning.

You'll help prevent AIDS.

KERRY: You'll help prevent unwanted children, unwanted pregnancies.

You'll actually do a better job, I think, of passing on the moral responsibility that is expressed in your question. And I truly respect it.

Go back and read it again.

John Kerry does not have a clue on life. First of all it is not a matter of one's religion whether one appreciates the right of every person to live. I know many people who espouse no formal religion who hold that every person has the right to life, including unborn children.

Second, it is not a tenet of the Catholic faith to believe that and unborn child is a human being. That is a matter of science and biology. The Catholic faith recognizes the scientific medical evidence that acknowledges that the unborn child is a part of the human community, but then again so does Judaism, Islam, and every other religion that uses reason to acknowledge the world.

Recognizing the unborn child as a human being does not require faith; it requires an honest intellect. It demands that the person examine the scientific evidence and come to the obvious conclusion that this entity, conceived in the womb of a human being as a result of the union of a sex cell from a male and female human being and containing all the genetic material of a human being, is and always will be, so long as he or she will live, a human being.

Didn't John Kerry take biology back in high school?
Didn't he take it at Yale?
Obviously he is not stupid.
No, he is not. He knows it is a human being. He knows that abortion kills the unborn child. He thinks it is perfectly fine for people to commit abortions upon women and children. He supports planned parenthood, the largest purveyor of abortion in the world. He wants the government to pay for them and he thinks that your tax dollars should be used to pay groups like Planned Parenthood to kill babies.

And not just in this country. No, he wants to send our tax dollars overseas to pay for abortions in other countries.

John Kerry wants to make the issue of opposing abortion a religious issue. He wants to divide people by using religion as a way to separate the way people think about this issue.

But abortion is not a religious issue. It is a HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE. It is a CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE. It is a LIFE and DEATH issue. It is a MORAL ISSUE. But it has nothing to do with religion or faith, except to the extent that religion of faith guide one's moral determinations.

Nat Hentoff, the columnist for the Village Voice, is an atheist. He is anti-abortion. Explain to Nat that it is a matter of "faith" and he will tell you that you are clueless.

How does John Kerry explain that the Constitution is about respecting human rights and protecting the right to life of persons - of human beings - not giving another person the right to kill the child in the womb?

How does John Kerry explain the Declaration of Independence which acknowledges that this right to life comes not from the government but from the Creator (otherwise known in most circles as God).

How does he - a lawyer - explain where in the constitution is the right to abort one's child?

Kerry claims that in order to represent the people he has to be "pro-choice." So let me get this straight. According to John Kerry, person must support a person's "right to choose" because he or she holds public office and represent the people. So according to Kerry, the politician can support segregation, or slavery, or drug use, or prostitution, or polygamy, or whatever, because these people are merely exercising their right to choose and the political office holder has no business making a moral judgment on any of these actions.

And he wants to be president.

Well, let me just add that he did answer the question in a round about way. He wants to spend tax dollars to kill the unborn babies of the poor. He wants to do that not only in this country but around the world. He is in favor of partial birth abortion. And voted against making it illegal. He voted against any law to limit access to abortion or to require parental notice prior to a minor having an abortion.

If the time was just prior to the Civil War, John Kerry would probably have been pro-choice on slavery. He would have voted in favor of the Fugitive Slave Act. He would have supported the Dred Scott decision. He would have opposed the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution. He would have been pro-choice regarding the Ku Klux Klan, claiming that they have a right to choose. It sounds extreme.

But then again so is John Kerry.