Monday, June 27, 2005

No on Gonzales

The White House does not need to put up any more trial balloons. We do not want Alberto Gonzales going to the Supreme Court. Who is the "we" that do not want him on the high court? Any pro-life activist worth his salt; any pro-life conservative with an ounce of sense; anyone hoping to see the court restored to its proper place in government.

So contact the White House and tell them that this nation deserves an honest forthright pro-life jurist for the Supreme Court.

If Sandra Day O'Connor steps down as is expected, and the president wants to nominate a woman, have him consider Edith Jones from the 5th Circuit. But frankly, I would like him to avoid this notion that there must a so many women and so many persons of different races on the bench. He should appoint the person he believes best capable of doing the job, one who believes and respects the dignity of every person, who acknowledges each person's inherent right to life, liberty and property, and who will abide by the rule of law and not opinion.

Every person who holds public office should value these basic principles of our Declaration of Independence and respect the fact that our rights do not originate with government but are to be secured and protected by government.

Supreme Court strikes again

For those of us involved in the Right to Life, summer and the supreme court always suggest strange and sometimes stupid sounds emanating from the clerk's office as the court reveals its latest crop of directives, dare I say, dictations to the poor masses on the so-called important issues of the day.

Today's rulings included two on the display of the Ten Commandments. Now I suppose that my legal training may be considered suspect, after all I did not study at Harvard or Yale, but I do not recall anything in the U.S. Constitution discussing the propriety of placement of the Ten Commandments on the walls of a public building.

I do remember being in the Supreme Court and I do believe that the Ten Commandments are located on the walls of the Supreme Court. So why can these supposedly intelligent persons not get it right. The decision was 5-4, and in the interest of full disclosure, the Court will allow states to place the commandments outside in a general display. See the Texas case. But really, is this the best they can do?

It is all a part of the continuing erosion of the legislative process, of the role of the states and of the executive branch of government to handle the ordinary non-constitutional issues of the day. And it once again forces me to remind everyone that this is what the Court in Roe v. Wade did to the states. Until 1973 the states had the unfettered right to protect its citizens from harm. Roe abolished that right and created out of whole cloth the so-called right to privacy (which by the way is not very private). By refining reality into courtspeak, the Supremes acted to allow for the wanton destruction of over 40,000,000 children during the last 32+ years. We are all suppose to stand by and worship at the temple of the Supreme Court.

Just as the First Commandment expressly condemns the notion that we can worship other gods, so the Court tells us that it alone can be the object of our adulation and obedience.

If you do not agree, then the government can always dispossess you of your property.

Well - think about it. You do not have a right to life anymore according to the U.S. Supreme Court.

You do not have a right to own property without permission of the state.

What's next?
This is why you all must contact the White House and tell the president - he must select a pro-life candidate for any vacancy on the bench. We need someone who respects our inherent right to life, liberty and property.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

Musings on the Supreme Court

Well, once again the U.S. Supreme Court decided to play its role as the imperial monarch and final arbiter of all things constitutional. Today's ruling deals with private property rights and whether the "just taking" of one's private property could be for another's private gain. Historically and constitutionally, the state could "take" one's land for a public use or purpose and provide just and fair compensation for the taking. Such public purpose could be for a road or public use. However today the court extended it to private gain. The 5-4 decision reflects the same mentality that gave us Roe v. Wade in 1973. We (the government) know better. We are your masters. You are to work, pay taxes and pretend to be in charge of your own destiny. If we ( the government) do not like what you are doing, then we will strip you of your rights and we (the court) will confirm the act.
Sounds like our rights keep getting smaller and smaller.
Now we hear rumors that O'Connor may step down before Rehnquist. Be ready to contact the White house with this message. A clear overt pro life justice - that is who must be appointed. No subtilties, no questions, no wimps.

If the candidate cannot tell everyone that Roe v. Wade is bad law, then he or she should not be considered.

If the candidate is timid, do not select him or her.

Prepare the candidate for the Senate hearings by having the person read all the great law review articles castigating the court for deciding Roe.

Let us have the debate now. Bring out Norma McCorvey to tell the world the truth about the fix that was in.

Publicize the Abortion papers by Blackmun and Brennan and Douglas to show that the court was not adjudicating but legislating.

Let's get organized now and make sure we are not hoodwinked by the pro-abortion republicans who have conned us before.

Remember that almost 40,000,000 children have died since 1973. The carnage must stop. The Supreme Court must be challenged before it robs us of all our God given rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. Now is the time for all of us to stand ready to contact our president and the Congress and demand an honest jurist.

Monday, June 20, 2005

On Father's Day

Gazing at the top of Humphrey's peak north of Flagstaff after three days of camping with my boys and other Dad's and their children ( we all gave the moms a break from the kids), I was reminded of the importance of fathers to children and and the nonstop attack on the role of men in raising children. There has been this continuous assault on the traditional understanding of the father, primarily instigated by the anti-life feminist types who seem angry at the world and everyone in it.
When we look at the last forty years and the current problems existing in the society, a lot of them can be attributed to the failure of men to be and act like real men. I can truthfully say that a lot of guys will avoid growing up if they don't have to (witness our previous president), and only do so if the women in their life demand it. But today's society sends so many mixed signals to young men and so many men have walked away from their responsibilities that it is understandable why there is so much confusion.
So let me pass on some advice from some of the real men I have known. It is pretty much common sense - but it seems that common sense is not very common anymore. These are not in any particular order.
1. Respect women at all times. Respect all the women in your life. Your mother, sister, wife. Treat every women as a person not as an object. Realize that in marriage there is a covenant that reflects the intimate relationship of God with His creation, with His people, with His Church.
2. The best way to show your sons how to treat women is to love your wife and treat her with the respect that explains why you married her in the first place. If young men will treat women with respect and as persons, the unwed pregnancy rate would drop like a rock.
3. God must be first in your life. If we have to answer to a higher authority, as opposed to our own weak selves, we are much less likely to do someone harm or act in a way that we will later regret.
4. Remember that children are a gift from the Lord. If you are blessed to be a dad, remember your children are not property, objects or people you are to live through. They are unique creations, created for a wonderful purpose. Our role as fathers is to help them find out their purpose in life.
5. Embrace the truth and do not be afraid to stand up for life and all that it requires. Men are built to be protectors of the truth, of the family, of the culture in general. We do not have to sit by and let others pervert it and destroy it. We have a responsibility, a duty, to promote that which is good and to confront that which is wrong.
6. Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman and it is for life. Do not engage in sexual intimacy before marriage. It hurts you and the other person. If you truly love another, you are always concerned about the other first. If you love someone, you do not want to do them harm, be it emotional, physical or spiritual.
7. Enjoy the company of other men and do not fear strong friendships which are also reflections of the love of God.
8. Defend life. Protect the widow and the orphan (in modern terms, the unwed mother and her unborn child). Provide for the less fortunate. Always give more than just your money. Give your talent, and your treasure. The irony is that you do always get more than you give.
We took the road less traveled back to the Valley yesterday. We saw so much more of the State and I could not help but marvel at the natural beauty of the land. It is something that I was happy to show my sons on this a very special Father's day.
post script.
My father is very dear to me. He has shown me how to be a husband and a father. But more than that, he has shown me through his life how much God loves me. You see that is how important we dads really are. For our children will consider that the love of God is very similar to the love of their father. The way we treat our children reflects on the way they will think that God will treat them. So - and I know this is a tough assignment - we have to be conduits of the love of God to our children. Thus it is that God will be pleased with our lives.

On Fr. Pavone's Visit

The energy that drives Fr. Pavone is contagious and we at Arizona right to life appreciate so much his being with us last Monday. I had the pleasure of being his chauffeur for the day and he was able to meet with priests, deacons and seminarians in the morning. He stopped by Maggie's Place to see the great work begin done there. He spoke to law students at the Blackstone Fellowship in the afternoon. Later he met with representatives of the Arizona Life Coalition. He celebrated mass at St. Thomas and later spoke to over 650 people who attended the presentation. He reminded us that if the right to life does not exist for the unborn child, then it does not exist for us. He told us about his visits to Terri Schiavo and the deep love of the family. He challenged us all to stand up and live the Gospel of Life.
After a brief reception at the AZRTL offices, Fr. Pavone caught the red eye for New York. His one day visit highlights the fact that we have much to do. We look forward to his visit in August.
I will add that he truly enjoyed meeting the many pro lifers during the day. He was impressed with the seriousness and the charity exhibited. Keep him and his work in your prayers.

Considering the comments of Senator Durbin

The fallout continues throughout the nation over the outrageous remarks of Senator Durbin (D - Ill) over the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
If only the mainstream press would recognize that the American people do not like their politicians calling their sons and daughters serving in the military war criminals, Nazis, et al. But they will try to ride this one out because it serves their agenda. After all when any pro life advocate compares the killing of unborn children with the holocaust, he or she is severely chastised by the mainstream press for making the comparison. Yet, how much closer to the Nazi holocaust is the abortion holocaust. After all both involve the systematic murder of a class of human beings deemed unwanted and devoid of value by those doing the killing.
And what of Dick Durbin's vote to prohibit the use of partial birth abortions on unborn children?
Well, the distinguished senator from Illinois voted against stopping the brutal practice. He is squarely in the pro-abortion camp. He embraces the pro abortion agenda. Perhaps he would not complain about the treatment of the prisoners at Gitmo if the government were "aborting" them, instead of turning up the temperature.
The problem with the current debate is that the use of language has become extremely sloppy and contrived. The "left" has co-opted the meaning of so many words and told the public that this is what something means. So that if one talks about the torture of innocent unborn babies by abortionists as the babies' arms and legs are ripped from their bodies, if one dares to show the pictures of dead children from abortion on the streets or at the university commons, the "Left" and the mainstream media will scream with horror and shock. But a picture from Abu Ghraib can be front page news for the New York Times, and woe to anyone who dare criticize the grey lady of the press.
Here are the facts. The "left" hates the military. The"left" hates America and all things American. These extremists hate children and that is why they like abortion. Oh, and they hate President Bush, too.
Here is the irony. The very freedom that we enjoy calls us to respect the right to life of all people. Our founding documents mention the right to life and the source of that right to life. Those who are enemies of the right to life are also enemies of the source of the right to life. Yet they scream that our military is not respecting the rights of these combatants. If our military treated the combatants as the pro-abortionists treat the unborn children and their mothers, there would be no prisoner problem. They would all be dead. After all that is the way of the Extreme Left. Need to solve a problem? Just kill them.
After all why should the rest of us be burdened. That is the mentality of the Dick Durbins and the Hillary Clintons, and the Janet Napalitanos and the Planned parenthoods of the world. Eliminate the unwanted, the burdernsome the inconvenient.
Now is this too rash? Are my comments out of place? Am I painting with a broad brush? Or am I just telling the truth?
Dick Durbin should be censured for his attack on our military servicemen and women. Now the question is - will the Senate do it?

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Judicial machinations

Some thoughts on the latest judicial happenings.

First - As of this post, Janice Rogers Brown has been confirmed to the DC Circuit Court of appeals. Mr. Pryor will be confirmed tomorrow following today's cloture vote. Next week four more nominees will be considered if all proceeds according to the plan. Frist can get what he wants by continuing to place the nominees before the Senate for an up or down vote.

Second - at the state level, the governor has the opportunity to appoint another Supreme Court justice. Why the merit selection committee sent up Scott Bales, an obvious compadre to the governor, when there are very qualified candidates for the position, points out the flaws of the current system. The other two candidates, both judges who have many years of experience on the bench, would appear to be window dressing to the process. Either candidate would be preferred to Mr. Bales who at 48 as no judicial experience, either at the trial or appellate level. So let us see if the governor will choose to stack the court with her friends or if she will choose to be principled and select either Judge Campbell or Judge Timmer.

Monday, June 06, 2005

Is anybody there?

I was asked by someone at the last meeting why I had not been making entries on a more regular basis and I said that I was not sure if I was being read. I had previously published some articles on various sites and was thinking of returning to that venue as they seemed more productive and added to the conversation.
The person told me to continue and assured me that people were reading the site. Perhaps I should not worry but I thought I would try something.

If you are reading this, post a comment. I do not care if it is long or short. But I would appreciate if those who are checking out the site would check in at least this time.

And just another reminder that Fr. Pavone is coming next Monday, June 13, 2005.

I am going home.

Sunday, June 05, 2005

Cinderellaman - another pro-life movie

It was Saturday night and I said to my wife. "Let's go see a movie. Let's go see Cinderellaman." I heard Hugh Hewitt mention it on his radio show as being worth seeing and whjen someone said it was Seabiscuit on two legs, well that cinched the deal. So we had dinner with the children, all took and evening swim - a regular event in the summer in Arizona, and after putting the little ones to bed, slipped out to the late showing.

What a great film. Every aspect of the movie was full and complete. Based on a true story, the story resonates with an understanding of the nature of the human person, with all of his virtues and vices, an appreciation for the noble purpose to which we are all called, and a recognition that to be a man, one must live for something greater than oneself.

I won't spend time being a movie critic other than say all of the actors gave inspired performances and i would expect this to be on everyone's list for the various film awards for 2005.

Now on to the pro-life dimension.

For those ofus in the right to life movement, respect for he person is the cornerstone of our position. We believe in the person, his or her relationship in the family and the role of the family in having a strong and stable society. We acknowledge that the man must stand up and defend life and protect his family from evil. We reverence the role of the mother in bringing new life into the world and remind people that raising a family is the most challenging and rewarding work on earth.

Well, this movie applauds the family. The husband loves his wife and the wife loves her husband and children. The hero will not suffer the dissolution of his family and we see to what lengths the protagonist will go to keep a promise that he made to his son.

There is respect for manual labor and the duty to provide for one's family. One sees the pain and frustration as these men during the Depression seek to find honest labor. There is also the reality that not everyone cares about the plight of the downtrodden. Yet it is not the troubles that end up breaking people but their own despair that does them in.

It is ironic that this most powerful of films in support of life and the family shoulkd deal with the very dangerous sport of boxing. Yet it is that very contrast which brings home the message that loving and protecting your family and getting a second chance to to it is what it is all about. In an age today where people do not fight to preserve their families, where quitting and leaving a family is the "world's" anwser to tough times, this film screams out that one whould never give up - that defending and protecting those treasures which God has given us, is always worth the effort.

James Braddock's story is truly one to inspire us to be the best we can be, to do the best we can do, and to live life with a sense of purpose and direction. His story tells us that virtue is its own reward and it is always better to do the right thing.

Finally throughout the movie, one could not avoid sensing that the virtue of hope is so much needed today as it was throughour the Depression. In religious art, the virtue of hope is sometimes drawn as an anchor. In the story, it is hope which keeps Braddock anchored to his family and his family to him. Hope is what compells the Right to Life movement. We believe in the future and we hope for a day when all children will be allowed to be born. These children in turn will be the hope of their parents and of their children. Such it is that everything we do has an historic relevance. This is why we promote life and abhor he taking of innocent unborn human life.

Let us all be wittnesses to hope. A hope that is anchored in a respect for the dignity of life. A hope found in creation and the Creator.

Friday, June 03, 2005

When you get to the heart of the issue, it is always about abortion

When I was new to the anti-abortion effort, now happily and more positively referred to as the "Pro-Life Movement," I found that most people did not want to discuss this issue with me for a variety of reasons. Perhaps I was not so diplomatic as I told them that this nation was killing 4000 babies a day and asked them what they were going to do about it. I was probably about as subtle as rock shattering glass when I would challenge priests, ministers, pastors, and others in the media to tell the truth and quit misrepresenting the issue to their congregations and audiences. I do remember in college that my friends, while sympathetic, would not join me in efforts to picket the abortion mills or pass out leaflets opposing pro-abortion candidates. It was frustrating and yet I could understand that this issue is not a pleasant one. Fighting abortion was not something that polite society did. Perhaps part of the reluctance of the middle class to get involved was due to the odious nature of the subject.

After all, when one performs or procures an abortion, a human being is killed. The abortionist actively takes the life of a human being in the womb. A woman participates in this act by presenting herself for the procedure. Those in the facility are collaborators in the death. The society allows it to occur. Our government refuses to stop it. Indeed there are judges and legislatures who promote and protect the grizzly act. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down laws that prohibited abortion and continues to sanction the barbaric act. It refuses to allow parents to protect their children from being exploited by abortion providers and fathers have no legal right to protect their unborn children.

Thirty-two years have passed since Roe v. Wade was decided. Over 40,000,000 babies have been killed under the protection of the current legal system. This is the same legal system that has attacked the definition of marriage, the right of the state to protect children from sexual predators and which blurs the distinctions concerning first amendment rights.

There is certainly good news in that pro life Americans represent a majority in the country; that when we vote, we can elect pro-life candidates, that no one really argues that abortion doesn't kill a baby or that it is a bad thing; and that the young people tend to understand that abortion is not a good thing for women. After all in all of this, the woman is as much a victim of the situation as the child.


How are we translating our actions into saving the babies and helping women?

How are we convincing the politicians that it [politics] cannot be business as usual?

Why do many of us not have a sense of urgency as we did years ago, when we were a little more "in your face" about how every day that goes by means another day of dead babies and injured women?

Is it that we just do not want to think about it?

I know that there are times when I do not want to think about the issue. I ask when will the killing stop. I mourn the death of all those little ones. I tremble when I think of the words of Thomas Jefferson who reminds us that there is a final reckoning and a final justice.

This applies somewhat to the issue of the judges and the stalemate in getting the up or down vote. Why after voting on Owen did the Senate not continue with Brown and Pryor? Why are we still waiting? Can we do it this coming week?

And why can't we just defund Planned Parenthood?

After all we have a deficit. There is no money to give to such groups.

And why is our policy at the Justice Department about investigating the criminal activities of these abortion facilities who are covering up child abuse issues so lackluster?

There is so much to do.
But it is not the time for hand wringing or living in the past.
We must deal with the here and now.

So I look in the mirror and ask myself - what have I done to make a difference, to help save a life, to help stop an abortion, to offer help to a mother in crisis lately?


What can I do today and tomorrow to help the cause?

Here is the challenge.

Take the mirror test.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Staying Focused

Those of us in the pro-life movement as well as those sympathetic to the cause must remind ourselves every so often that everything we do must reflect our love for life, how every single person began as a single cell, and how we are all going to die some day.
We must also continue to be attentive of news and current events to that we may be prepared for anything we may need to do to advance the pro life agenda.

One such event is the upcoming visit by Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life. Fr. Pavone was very helpful to the Schindler family during the Terri Schiavo tragedy. He will speak following the 5:30 pm mass at St. Thomas the Apostle Catholic Church in central Phoenix. He will address the importance of staying focused and remaining vigilant as the "world' attempts to divert us from the work we need to do.

On a different note, another reason why the Senate needs to confirm honest judicial candidates is to prevent the type of ruling that came out of Mississippi yesterday.

In that case a federal judge struck down a state law that required 2nd trimester abortions be done in a licensed outpatient facility or a hospital. Apparently the state legislature did not want anymore women dying from late term abortions and sought to craft a law to protect women from this deadly procedure.

But "choice" trumps common sense in the courts these days and the very notion that someone would have to have competent medical treatment for a dangerous operation that kills women was too much for the abortionists in Mississippi. Too much to for a federal judge who is more in league with abortion providers and less with the constitution and the rule of law.