If thin-skinned Ray hadn't blocked me from his post about the reports that he would have us believe show that Christians have nothing to fear from the new hate crimes law, I would have asked if it's true that the Lavender Mafia is out to break some D.C. priests' kneecaps as Catholic League's Bill Donohue tells us: http://www.catholicleague.c...
The most telling quote:
The Catholic League is prepared to assist any priest in the Archdiocese of Washington who is the victim of harassment, intimidation or stalking. Whatever resources the priest needs, we will see to it that he is served. If radical gay activists want a showdown with the Catholic League, we will not disappoint them.
WOOOOOOOOOO! That's talkin' smack, man! Reminds me of last night's valley championship match in volleyball between Frontier and Garces. But rather than root for the Catholic girls, I was cheering on my niece's Frontier squad, which stormed back to win in five sets, with the final play a vicious kill off the face of a Garces player.
Anyway, it's edifying that the U.S. Catholic bishops in their fall meeting this week resoundingly voted in favor of a pastoral letter that calls out same-sex marriage as a "multifaceted threat to the very fabric of society": http://www.calcatholic.com/...
That is especially heartening in light of TBC columnist Valerie Schulz's recent column in which she betrayed the Catholic Church's teachings in calling for legalizing gay marriage so that she could not feel so guilty about her daughter getting hitched with a same-sex partner in Oregon. To solve a problem like Schulz, I am going to do the charitable thing and send a letter to the diocese's bishop and ask that he do the right thing and remove her from teaching catchecism (assuming she is still doing that as she mentioned in a previous column). After all, a lay minister in Maine recently was removed from her post when she wrote a letter to the editor in support of gay marriage.
Lastly, I wish to share the latest email that I received from the guy who looks gay but is a happily married straight man with kids:
The great victories in Maine and New York-23 for pro-marriage forces continue to reverberate up and down the Eastern Seaboard.
NJ.com reported on Nov. 18 ("Gay Marriage... Now!"): "The word on the street is that the gay marriage initiative in the New Jersey State House is in big trouble. Apparently, the Democrats can't get enough votes to pass it, even though outgoing Governor Jon Corzine is prepared to sign it."
Praise God! And pray harder--this fight is not finished yet.
No wonder even New Jersey Democrats are having second thoughts. Jon Corzine ran on a pro-gay-marriage platform and he lost. Dede Scozzafava voted for gay marriage twice in New York--and she was trounced by an unknown third party candidate. Do these New Jersey politicians want to follow Jon Corzine over the political cliff?
If we can hold off this juggernaut over the next six weeks, we can prevent the New Jersey legislature from imposing gay marriage on voters whether they like it or not! I promised you, when I asked you to join with NOM, that we would fight for marriage wherever and whenever we needed. We knew that after Maine we would have to pivot and turn to New Jersey, where gay marriage advocates has promised their supporters they would push a bill through the lame duck session. NOM is different from most organizations--we go where the fight needs to be, to make sure that your voice and your values are heard.
In D.C. the city councilmembers appear to be men with hardened hearts. We suspect they will not listen to reason or to their constituents and will instead push a gay marriage bill through the council. But the fight will not end there. Not with Bishop Harry Jackson and others leading the charge to fight through the legal fog and the media spin to give the people of D.C. the power to take control of the future of marriage. Sitting in the council chambers watching liberal politicians condescend and lecture to these brave black pastors about civil rights would give anyone with any sense of history an odd feeling. Still, the room burst out in wild applause when these leaders of the black church stood up for their--for our--right to vote for marriage.
Why do we fight so hard? This week the Catholic bishops released a statement, "Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan." It's a document worth reading by any person of faith, or anyone who cares about the future of marriage.
On same-sex marriage the Catholic bishops remind us that we hold these truths to be self-evident: "Marriage, this clinging together of husband and wife as one flesh, is based on the fact that
man and woman are both different and the same. They are different as male and female, but the
same as human persons who are uniquely suited to be partners or helpmates for each other."
I've included a link below if you want to read more. (I've also included NOM president Maggie Gallagher's statement in her column on Carrie Prejean--keep her in your prayers.)
What do we have on our side in this fight? Nothing but truth, justice, and the majority of the American people! And a God who watches over each and every one of us.
You are the reason NOM can do all that we do. Thank you.
 Faithfully,
Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
*Twas the month before Christmas*
*When all through our land,*
*Not a Christian was praying*
*Nor taking a stand.*
*See the PC Police had taken away,*
*The reason for Christmas - no one could say.*
*The children were told by their schools not to sing,*
*About Shepherds and Wise Men and Angels and things.*
*It might hurt people's feelings, the teachers would say*
* December 25th is just a ' Holiday '.*
*Yet the shoppers were ready with cash, checks and credit*
*Pushing folks down to the floor just to get it!*
*CDs from Madonna, an X BOX, an I-pod*
*Something was changing, something quite odd! *
*Retailers promoted Ramadan and Kwanzaa*
*In hopes to sell books by Franken & Fonda.*
*As Targets were hanging their trees upside down*
* At Lowe's the word Christmas - was no where to be found.*
*At K-Mart and Staples and Penny's and Sears*
*You won't hear the word Christmas; it won't touch your ears.*
*Inclusive, sensitive, Di-ver-si-ty*
*Are words that were used to intimidate me.*
*Now Daschle, Now Darden, Now Sharpton, Wolf Blitzen*
*On Boxer, on Rather, on Kerry, on Clinton!*
*At the top of the Senate, there arose such a clatter*
*To eliminate Jesus, in all public matter.*
*And we spoke not a word, as they took away our faith*
* Forbidden to speak of salvation and grace*
*The true Gift of Christmas was exchanged and discarded*
*The reason for the season, stopped before it started.*
*So as you celebrate 'Winter Break' under your 'Dream Tree'*
*Sipping your Starbucks, listen to me.*
*Choose your words carefully, choose what you say*
*Shout MERRY CHRISTMAS ,
not Happy Holiday!*
Please, all Christians join together and
wish everyone you meet during the holidays a
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Christ is The Reason for the Christ-mas Season!
Freedom of speech is still in the Constitution, is it not? http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Furthermore, the same document requires the president to be a natural-born citizen instead of a native-born citizen, does it not? http://www.therightsideofli...
Joseph Farah of World Net Daily slaps down the pseudo-news organization:
As for Sarah Palin, keep on doing what you're doing, baby! You got 'em on the run. You scare them to death! When they have to lie about what you say and do to make their point, you know you're saying and doing something right.
http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Ouch.
The Obama administration is more dangerous to America in many ways than any terrorist organization. What this cabal is doing to the country in stripping it of its most cherished values, its basic morality, its foundation on the rule of law, its liberties and its economy is more devastating than anything Mohammed and his zealots could have ever imagined.
Let's hear it for Joseph Farah: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Ouch.
Halfway through "Going Rogue," I look forward to the further adventures of our plucky heroine and the Palin family, especially husband Todd whose history is so much more "diverse" and manly than Obama's that "Dreams" should have been written about him.
Let's hear it for Jack Cashill: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Fellow Catholics, a second collection will be taken up this weekend for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, which has donated to left-wing organizations that openly oppose the Church's teachings, including infamously to that odious organization known as ACORN to the tune of $7 million over the years.
Instead of giving any money, download and print a coupon from the article at the following link to put into the basket: http://www.calcatholic.com/...
That'll teach 'em to get their priorities straight and stop their unholy alliances.
Remember when the Democrats were giddy over the prospect of a widening rift in the Republican camp when the traditional faction abandoned a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage Republican in favor of a third-party candidate who shares its values in the recent New York congressional race?
Well, let's see if they don't end up peeing in their pants should the Stupak-Pitts amendment restricting abortion funding in the House version of the health-care reform bill cause a divide in their own camp: http://www.creativeminority...
If the amendment is kept, no doubt the pro-abortion maniacs will scream bloody murder. If it is stripped, it will be interesting to see if those who voted for the amendment will stick to their principles or be exposed as liars.
Wouldn't it bust a gut to see the secularists who delight in caricaturing the faithful as being anti-science start to wail and gnash their teeth in realization that their "god" is betraying them by affirming the truths as taught by religion and faith, as Star Parker tells us? http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Why, technology may even help us to understand the universe through something as innocuous as a piece of ancient cloth: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
No need to order the DVD when you can watch it free on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Speaking of levitation, looks like our master may still be up to his old tricks: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
And why do I say that? Just a hunch, yet in keeping with today's reading from the Gospel of Mark: http://ewtn.com/vbible/sear...
But there's also the raft of heavenly messages that a new book (given an imprimatur by a cardinal) chronicles, making "Catholics believe Mary has come to warn her children that humanity is about to suffer an increase in natural disasters, a great apostasy, and God’s justice and divine wrath, due to the increase of sin in the world today": http://www.earthtimes.org/a...
If indeed it's just a matter of when during our lifetimes, not if, the events that will include a Warning followed by a Great Miracle will take place, then it may behoove you to know what to expect. And it's not a pretty picture.
I was going to add something snarky here about those who are the impetus of the prophecies, but Berean has been hounding me to dispense sugar instead of vinegar.
So have a nice day and enjoy life while you can.
How odd that a former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic suddenly is a persona non grata at the Episcopalian church she attends after having a change of heart and becoming pro-life: http://www.lifenews.com/sta...
Perhaps she can go back to the old Baptist church that kicked her out now that she has repented of her pro-choice ways. Berean should be thrilled to hear that, as well as see the wisdom of the carrot and stick approach.
By the way, does anyone know whether our undocumented president ever cracked open the document that was given to him by the pope during their meeting some time ago? http://www.lifesitenews.com...
Chee, and all Lou did was ask for the undocumented president to shut the "Birthers" up by proving that he is an American citizen as Lou believed he was. Instead, the Obazombies went bananas: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Somebody should have warned Rep. Nathan Deal before doing a Lou Dobbs himself: http://www.therightsideofli...
It doesn't help that a court is making what attorney Leo Donofrio calls "a lame judicial attempt at defining the 'natural born citizen' clause": http://naturalborncitizen.w...
But I digress. The focus of this posting should be on Lou, whom World Net Daily's founder, Joseph Farah, hails as a real newsman who will be the Communist News Network's loss: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
Like Farah, I hope Fox News swoops in to get him. But even Farah has his doubts about Fox. But it worked out well for Glenn Beck.
Hat tip to the American Papist for the revelation that the new New Jersey and Virginia governors are strong Catholics. I had known that Christie was one, but had no idea that McDonnell is likewise. That makes the recent elections that much more sweeter. Looks like the tide is indeed turning.
 On January 19th 2009 the new governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, will be sworn-in to office at 11:30 AM.
But earlier that day, at 9:00 AM, he will attend a Mass celebrated by Archbishop John Myers at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart.
He opposes gay marriage and wants to allow the people of his state to vote on it, while on the other side, the Democrat Legislature is trying to legalize gay marriage during the upcoming lameduck session.
Christie is also pro-life, and didn't hide that fact during the race. Like many pro-life politicians, he is forced to take an incremental approach (such as parental notification, a 24-hour waiting period and a ban on partial-birth abortions), but at least he is sincerely trying.
Jon Corzine, Christie's opponent in the race, attached him for his pro-life, pro-family positions.
The other new governor to be sworn in early next year is Bob McDonnell, equally pro-life and pro-family (from what I've heard). McDonnell was ruthlessly and relentlessly attacked for his pro-life, pro-family positions, as was his attorney general candidate friend, Ken Cuccinelli (who also won, despite the Washington Post calling him a "bigot" the weekend before the election).
Remembering off the top of my head, the Washington Post alone published something like 40 or 50 individual stories about McDonnell's thesis in school, where, among other things, McDonnell expressed conservative and/or "Catholic" perspectives on the role of women in the work place, the effects of abortion and contraception on society, etc.
I'm a bit fuzzy on all the details - and readers are welcome (as always) to correct them in the comment box - but the basic point is this: two Catholic candidates won elections this year to state-wide office without compromising their pro-life, pro-family principles.
The world didn't end, and once they are in office, they won't conduct witch hunts against those who disagree with them on these issues - but they will use their office to promote these central values, which transcend any one religion or political party. Catholics aren't pro-life and pro-family, after all, only because the Church tells them to be so, but rather, they are encouraged to hold true to these commonsense principles because of the witness and encouragement of their Catholic faith.
You read a lot, and heard a lot about how dangerous were Christie and McDonnell's "Catholic" beliefs during the election, but you won't hear much about these "dangers" now, because in the meantime, the people of Virginia and New Jersey chose them for elected office.
I think this reality scares some pro-abortion, anti-marriage individuals. But it should encourage us.
Wonder what our good Greek Orthodox fellow blogger Wayfarer/Sojourner, who has been absent since the end of July (hope he's OK), would have had to say about this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/...
Isn't it splendid that secularism and relativism have been the great unifying force in the battle between good and evil?
Thanks to blogger Dad29 for bringing my attention to a well-crafted essay by a Harvard college and law school grad who doesn't share a whole lot of Sarah Palin's values but sees her as being a more qualified candidate than any of the others that both sides have put forth in recent years:
November 8, 2009 - by James V. DeLong
The frenetic hostility to Sarah Palin, even by many on the Republican side, is unnerving, because her qualifications to be president are objectively better than those of almost anyone who has been on the national ticket over the past decade.
A reasonable conclusion is that these qualifications are precisely the cause of the hostility. To admit to the reality that the dominant political class, including the MSM and the punditocracy of both parties, has been giving us abysmal presidential candidates, to accept that a hockey mom plucked from small-town Alaska is better than the best that the political class can come up with, would require recognition of the terrible truth that the system has become deeply dysfunctional. Doing this would force our political elites to look into an abyss of serious questions about the functioning of our democracy. Palin creates a cognitive dissonance so intense that it simply cannot be accepted.
To start, compare her experience as a person, mayor, and state leader with George W. Bush’s pre-presidential career as an alcoholic, baseball executive, and ornamental governor. Whatever one thinks of his performance as president — and like most conservatives my views are complex — he was not promising material as of 2000.
Al Gore would be disqualified by knowledge of his academic career and by a reading of Earth in the Balance, an exercise in messianic ignorance. His subsequent career getting rich from climate change subsidies would reinforce this opinion. John Kerry had a Senate career of unbroken mediocrity, compounded by his unapologized-for Winter Soldier exercise and the still-unanswered Swift Boat questions.
John Edwards had no shadow of a qualification, and again the judgment is confirmed by subsequent events.
Obama’s qualifications were will-o-the-wisp. His supporters cited his “potential,” as they had to, because his only actual feat was his first book — and the claims that this was ghosted have been met by non-denial. The Asia Times characterizes these rumors as “well-established,” which tells one something about current foreign assessments of Obama. The president’s long-standing ties to the radical left should have tipped the balance to the negative.
Vice President Joe Biden has a long history of blurring the line between fantasy and reality to a degree that one wonders if he sees any distinction, but 36 years of this is enough to make him “qualified.” This, too, tells a lot about the mental processes of the dominant political class.
One can deeply respect John McCain’s courage and service. But he is an erratic senator, with a tendency to reach decisions on a whim and then excoriate anyone who disagrees. As demonstrated by McCain-Feingold — which hamstrings the middle-class base of the Republicans while leaving intact the power of unions and public employees, the media, the rich, and Native American tribes — McCain does not, or cannot, think even two moves ahead.
This leaves Joe Lieberman and Dick Cheney as the only candidates with any weight, and Palin’s executive experience gives her an edge over Lieberman.
The list may not be impressive, but being number two is not bad.
The biases of the political class also explain why Palin got sandbagged at the outset. Anyone familiar with the world of Washington private schools knows that they are experts at resume building — creating scads of extracurricular activities and awards so that every student can shine for the college of his or her choice. Well, the kids learned it from their parents, who are also experts at blowing air into the CV.
Palin was called inexperienced because she had never gone on a five-photo-ops-with-foreign-leaders-in-four-days tour, held show hearings on the topic du jour, introduced meaningless legislation, or had her staff give her a list of the publications she should say she was currently reading.
In fact — and of course — negotiating with Exxon is better preparation for negotiating with Putin than is a foreign photo op. And running a town is a miles-better education than warming a Senate seat. But again, it is not in the interests of the political class to acknowledge this.
So her handlers tried to cram her into a D.C. frame of reference by stuffing her with facts on national and international issues that could withstand grilling from a gotcha! press, something that was neither possible nor the right game.
Palin should instead have conceded that of course she would not be ready to be president on day one, but that:
1. What she had turned her hand to, she had quickly learned to do successfully — and this ability, based on her solid grounding in the realities of American life, was and is the real test.
2. If she were called upon on day one, she would be the head of a government, not a lone individual, and she had the experience in handling people that would be necessary to tap into the collective intelligence of the nation.
Those are called real qualifications!
Since the election, Palin has learned her lesson about the political handlers and she has followed Mao’s advice, as channeled through Anita Dunn — “you fight your war and I’ll fight mine.”
Her resignation from the governorship, which was mostly condemned by the pundits, was dead-on shrewd. Why let herself be tied down defending perjured ethics charges from people with infinite money, whose only desire is to shut her up or bankrupt her? Her willingness to be herself and pursue her own ideas without regard to whether or not they could lead to future office is a source of great political strength. Her public pronouncements, such as the Hong Kong speech, are serious and adult, unlike most of the vapidity produced by politicians, especially Obama. And Palin is mastering the art of short, sharp statements.
None of this is winning over the political class. Indeed, Palin’s refusal to fulfill their desires that she be a clown or take a proper role in the kabuki theater of Washington is making them angrier than ever and more determined to marginalize her. But the disillusionment with government among the tea-partying middle class is so great that every attack on her builds her stature on Main Street.
Is Palin going to be nominated? Hard to tell, even assuming she wants it. The unrelenting hostility of the media does have an insidious effect. She also needs to achieve the discipline in speaking that she displays with her written pronouncements — more brevity and less nattering — but this is doable.
The cultural issues are more important. There is a middle ground of people who are against the increasing bipartisan kleptocracy but not conservative on cultural matters — personally, I am pro-choice (but with reasonable caveats about the exercise of that choice), utterly indifferent to gay marriage, pro-gun, pro-decriminalization of marijuana, in favor of a forward strategy towards the terrorist wing of Islam and with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and sympathetic to China’s extraordinary effort to remake itself economically and politically.
Ultimately, this may or may not make me into a Palin supporter. But either way, our most fundamental current crisis is the inability of the political class to produce plausible leaders, and its hostility to anyone, such as Palin, who threatens the system. The election of Obama was a symptom of our current dysfunctional politics, not a cause.
We need more Palins, not fewer.
The Creative Minority Report comes through once again in exposing the double standards of the leftists and secularists with a trifecta of doozies:
Behold the anti-Bush, courtesy of the Creative Minority Report:
Oh how they howled! Chuckled. Mocked. "What a simpleton," they declared when George W. Bush referred to himself as "The Decider." Obama, determined to be anything but Bush, should now just as boldy claim that he is "The In-Decider"
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.
That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.
After months and months of dithering on whether to accept the request of the General that he put in charge of Afghanistan for more troops, Obama has finally decided not to decide, again! The unwavering vacillation of the Commander-in-chief on the best way to achieve his own policy is remarkable if only for its staggering obtuseness.
While Winston Churchill routinely criticized the naïveté of Neville Chamberlain for his policy of Nazi appeasement, he likewise always maintained that Chamberlain veritably sought nothing but peace. Chamberlain, time and again, gave in to Hilter falsely convicted he was a man of his word. Chamberlain ingenuously accepted assurances that after the annexation of the Sudetanland, Hilter had no further territorial ambitions in Europe. His short-lived triumph of naïveté was smashed by harsh reality when within months when Hilter took the rest of Czechoslovakia.
Chamberlain's initial reaction was to say that England should stay the course, that peace could only be achieved from the avoidance of war at any cost. But then Chamberlain, for his part, took a few days to mull the effect of his efforts after the Hilter's taking of Czechoslovakia. Then, in an about face stunning even Churchill, Chamberlain publicly recognized the folly of his policy and began the preparations for war.
Even Chamberlain, probably the most maligned appeaser of all time, was capable of making a decision when faced with the cold hard facts. Even Chamberlain eventually recognized that the peace he sought would only be realized in war. Even Chamberlain realized that his failure to respond to the challenges of the aggressor increased the aggression and the cost of undoing it. Even Chamberlain.
For this Churchill, while leaving his judgment to history, defended the honor and motives of Chamberlain to the end. Will we be able to do the same? I can't decide.
Oh, boy, wait till they count those absentee votes, which likely were mailed in before RINO DeDe Scozzafava bailed out and threw her endorsement to the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, now that a recanvassing shows Hoffman to have lost by a much narrower margin.
http://www.syracuse.com/new...
Is the fat lady still around so she can redo the act if it turns out that the GOP actually pulled off a sweep in the elections?
Behold an excellent rebuttal to the California congresswoman, my new least favorite person for believing in taxpayer money funding abortion but not in tax exemptions for religious organizations:
Rory Cooper Dir., Strategic Communications, Heritage Foundation :
Yesterday, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey commented in Politico that the IRS should go after the Catholic Bishops who had an opinion on the pro-abortion health care language being debated in the House. As a Catholic, I’m offended by Rep. Woolsey’s attempt to silence Catholics across America, but I of course, forgive her. Unfortunately, Rep. Woolsey doesn’t clearly understand the Constitutional idea of separating church and state. It is not to silence your critics who may be people of faith. The U.S. Conference of Bishops has every constitutional protection under the first amendment to petition their government, without fear that the head of the Progressive Caucus will use the IRS to intimidate them, or call them “bullies.”
Is Ms. Woolsey as quick to also ask Jewish leaders to no longer justifiably and rightfully lobby on behalf of Israel? Is Rep. Woolsey going to send the IRS over to Attorney General Eric Holder’s house since he is speaking to a group affiliated with the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)? Or is it merely open season on Catholics because they institutionally have a different view on the sanctity of life than the Congresswoman? It appears from her editorial that one of Rep. Woolsey’s biggest concerns is that she isn’t allowed to campaign inside churches. Any person of faith in Rep. Woolsey’s district should stand up for every person of faith, and their ability to address their constitutional concerns with their elected members of Congress.
The Conference of Bishops had every right to be concerned. The Senate is absolutely going to reinsert the federal funding of abortions into their version of the bill, and President Obama is on record as saying he supports that action. However, the problem is that progressives like Rep. Woolsey can’t count the votes. The Stupak amendment easily passed in a liberally dominated House. More than half of America identifies themselves as pro-life in multiple surveys this year. But even many on the pro-choice side of the argument agree that taxpayers should not be on the hook to pay for abortion procedures.
The Stupak amendment probably saved the House bill to live through conference, but it showed America that this bill has no chance of passing unless the far left who want every American to chip in for abortions are willing to concede that point. And why wouldn’t they? Is this the issue they’re going to allow their version of health care reform to be killed over? Simply put, President Obama and the Progressive Caucus know that their plan is the first step towards a single payer system where all Americans must go hat in hand to the federal government for health care. And when that is the case, President Obama and the Progressive Caucus want to be able to provide abortion coverage. They know that if this health care bill passes without abortion funding, it would be nearly impossible to insert it later when the government finally destroys private insurance.
Two things all pro-life and pro-choice Americans should be, and seem to be, able to agree on is that pro-life Americans shouldn’t be forced to pay for abortions, and that anyone regardless of their religion should be able to speak out on the issue or any other issue. Many Congresspersons courageously voted their conscience on the Stupak amendment and I applaud all of them, especially Democrats who may have been being pressured by the Speaker or Rep. Woolsey.
Rep. Woolsey callously said yesterday of the Catholic Bishops: “Who elected them to Congress?” I can only hope that Rep. Woolsey soon learns that her title denotes representation, even of Catholics.
Interesting analyses by Arizona Congressman John Shaddeg, who thinks his Republican colleagues missed a golden opportunity to drive a stake through the heart of the foul-smelling beast called Obamacare by simply voting "present": http://www.calcatholic.com/...
Shaddeg was the only one to do so apparently because of complications that could end up making the GOP hypocrites if they betrayed the Democratic pro-lifers who voted for the Stupak-Pitts amendment to kill abortion funding from the bill: http://www.calcatholic.com/...
Now the stage is set for the amendment to be stripped from the bill during the House-Senate conference to hammer out the final version of the bill. I think doing so will doom its chances of passing because it will take only three of the 40 Democrats who voted for the amendment to stick to their guns. Now that will look bad if any of the Democrats betrayed the Republicans who sided with them on this issue and instead caved in to the pro-abortion crybabies. They will say "they tried," but that won't be convincing in the least bit. Three of the Democrats who backed the amendment, certainly more out of political convenience that out of conviction, are from California:http://www.calcatholic.com/...
Speaking of betrayal, no one has been a bigger offender than the undocumented president, who had promised the U.S. Catholic bishops that abortion funding will not be in the bill. To reiterate Congressman Joe Wilson's spot-on remark: YOU LIE! Catholic League's Bill Donohue tells us why: http://www.catholicleague.c...
As for Planned Parenthood's charge that the bishops have hijacked the bill, all I can say is: "Excuse me. Can you tell me who hijacked the Democratic Party that I once used to belong to?" http://www.catholicnewsagen...
I imagine their screeching will quickly turn against the senators who may let the other shoe drop on their noggins: http://www.politico.com/new...
By the way, it's edifying that Congressman Patrick Kennedy, who also has blasted the Catholic Church for its stance on the bill, be given the smackdown by his bishop: http://fratres.wordpress.co...
The bill wasn't killed in the first trimester, so the question is whether it will be a second- or third-trimester abortion--or dare I say a partial-birth abortion? Patrick Archbold at the Creative Minority Report tells us why he thinks the abortion funding issue, in a dose of poetic justice, will spell the bill's doom, sinking madam speaker's spirits like a 1,990-page bill around her neck:
Picture this, you are U.S. Senator and a Democrat. You come from a moderate to conservative State. Your re-election is by no means a foregone conclusion. You saw what happened in '94 and you know it can happen again. You also know that the country is enormously concerned with out of control spending and massive government encroachment. Regardless of the spin your colleagues post election, you know that the public just sent a message, knock it off. You sense the truth, backlash is building.
So now, as a Democrat Senator, you are faced with the House plan for a government takeover of healthcare. Nancy Pelosi had the luxury of allowing 39 of her colleagues in vulnerable districts to vote against the bill for cover. You will not be so lucky. Every single Democrat Senator will need to vote for the Senate version in order to get cloture. There is no get out of jail free card for you.
Conventional wisdom states that abortion is an issue in the House but not in the Senate but you know that conventional wisdom is completely wrong in this case. Abortion is everything. The House version of the bill had the Stupak amendment prohibiting federal funds for abortion. You know that such an amendment will not be introduced in the Senate. When the bill is being reconciled in conference, the Stupak amendment will likely be struck. In fact, over 40 pro-abortion reps in the house have said if it is not struck, they will vote against final passage. Unless it pays for abortion, there is no deal.
Conversely, the House bill passed only because of the Stupak amendment and then only by 3 votes. If the Stupak language is struck in conference, in all likelihood at least three of the 65 Dems ( and probably more) who voted for Stupak will bail on the final bill. It only takes a few.
So with abortion in, the bill is dead. Take it out and it is probably dead anyway. So why should I, a Democrat Senator up for re-election, vote for an unpopular bill that my opponent in 2010 will hang around my neck like a millstone when chances are it will fail when it goes back to the House? Answer? I shouldn't and I won't. The risk is too high. Best to let the thing die before ever being voted on in the Senate. I am not going to risk re-election by voting for this thing when it will never make final passage. No, not me. I think I will feign concern over the cost and such and maybe, just maybe, I will survive the backlash. Afterall, surviving is priority number one.
And that my friends is how Obamacare might die. Pray.
It's edifying that World Net Daily's founder once again is calling out his colleagues at the state-run media for perpetuating nonsense such as this:
Exclusive: Joseph Farah exposes media double standard favoring stealth jihadists
Posted: November 08, 2009
11:38 pm Eastern
By Joseph Farah
Are you sick to your stomach about the way the media have soft-pedaled the latest Islamic terrorist attack at Fort Hood?
Do you share my disbelief at the way the press has gone out of its way to portray this slaughter as something other than what it clearly is?
Do you plan to share your revulsion with members of the media who have attempted to bury coverage of the shocking findings of the new book, "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," at the very moment this book needs maximum attention if we are to protect our country from future attacks?
Far from being a setback to the organized front groups for jihadism, the massacre at Fort Hood has been a public relations boon to them.
While the courageous American authors of this book have been systematically shut out of mainstream media coverage, the stealth jihadists who pose as Muslim civil rights proponents have had a press field day warning against phantom retribution against innocent Muslims.
Hey guys! This is America. Not one Arab-American, not one Muslim-American has been attacked in response to the wholesale slaughter at Fort Hood. I'm an Arab-American, and I don't have any fear that my neighbors are going to hunt me down because of what happened at Fort Hood. I do, however, fear that I may be a victim of a terrorist attack. And I know I will face retribution in some form for publishing "Muslim Mafia."
Do you want to be outraged? Check out this videotape of radical Muslims condoning the slaughter at Fort Hood.
This is happening in the streets of America. No arrests. No condemnation. No attacks.
I'm not even aware of any temporary restraining orders being filed against these creeps.
All I can say is they are very lucky this Arab-American wasn't walking down that street when they pulled this stunt!
Why aren't we seeing this on Fox News?
Why aren't we seeing this on CNN?
Why aren't we seeing this on MSLSD?
Why is it that all we see are the front group spokesmen – even those that are part of an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator?
I've just about had it.
I don't know what is happening to this country.
Have we gone insane?
What must occur before we awaken to the threat posed by the Saudi-sponsored Muslim Brotherhood terrorist front groups operating with impunity inside America?
How many Americans need to die?
Maybe you're asking what you can do about this.
I'll tell you what you can do.
- Purchase a copy of "Muslim Mafia." Better yet, purchase two copies – one for you and one for your member of Congress.
- Support our legal defense fund established to support one of the co-authors of the book who has already been slapped with an expensive lawsuit by the Council on American-Islamic Relations – one of the previously named unindicted terrorist co-conspirators. (That's right! Even though CAIR has been officially identified as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator, the group is using the U.S. courts to wage its legal jihad.)
- Write, e-mail and call the television news programs you watch and ask why you haven't seen the authors of this shocking book on their programs. I'm convinced they will only respond to demands from viewers.
You and I know what Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is. He's a terrorist. Why won't the media come clean? Why are they dancing around the obvious? Why were they so unwilling even to tell us his name? Why were they so quick to rule out even the possibility of the Fort Hood attack being terrorism-related when almost every American knew what it was from the beginning?
Are we living in a parallel universe?
Have we lost all of our senses?
Don't we recognize America is at war?
Don't we realize we are all targets?
Star Parker is spot on in telling what it will take for the GOP to get back on course, most notably that free-market capitalism cannot prosper in a society that abandons traditional values. Think about it ... if society is allowed to let the dictatorship of relativism break it down, we know who will step in to take care of the mess and who will pay dearly for it. But to right the ship and sail in smooth waters will mean being supportive of those who don't like to rock the boat and are anchored in the truth.
By the way, I am an independent voter but am fully behind the GOP at this time as it's clear the party is much more receptive to the values voters like myself.
Pair of challenges – 1 internal, 1 external – will yield success
Posted: November 07, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
By Star Parker
RNC Chairman Michael Steele and the New York Yankees can look back on a good week. Maybe Steele deserves extra credit.
No one was writing obituaries a year ago for the Yankees as was the case for the Republican Party.
Now we have a different picture. Borrowing from the words of Mark Twain, reports of the death of the Republican Party were greatly exaggerated.
The operative question today for Mr. Steele and his party, in the wake of winning governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, both Obama states in 2008, is "Now what?"
Will voter discontent that led to these Republican victories be parlayed into a genuine Republican renaissance?
As independent voters move away from Democrats and lean back toward Republicans, which is what happened in Virginia and New Jersey, and what polling over the year has shown to be happening nationwide, will Republicans build a solid new tent?
Will they rebuild their party with values critical for restoring a sick nation to health?
In order to genuinely rebuild, Republicans must successfully take on two big challenges – one internal and one external.
First, a notion that has divided the party – that free-market economics and the social "values" agenda are separate cards to be played – must be purged. The more libertarian stream – Republicans whose principal concerns are limited government, low taxes and free markets – have viewed Christian social conservatism as dead weight in the party. This is a mistake.
Christian conservatives, on the other hand, with legitimate concerns about the moral framework of the nation, concerns about the integrity of the American family and about the ongoing abortion holocaust, have given shorter shrift to the importance of constitutionally limited government and free markets.
These two streams within the Republican Party that have been flowing in parallel must be channeled into one powerful river. It is not either-or. Both are essential.
We cannot lose sight that we won't have a prosperous nation without free markets and government limited as our Constitution originally intended.
But we also must recognize that a free economy cannot function without trust, that trust will not exist without a moral people, and that the means through which values and morality are transmitted, generation to generation, is family.
Those who don't appreciate the importance of the social agenda should consider that when Reagan was elected in 1980, 18 percent of American babies were born to unwed mothers. Today it is 40 percent. This kind of family disintegration is incompatible with a free and functioning society.
The second challenge, one getting some lip service but practically being ignored by Republicans, is the demographic changes occurring in the country.
Although white Americans today constitute 65 percent of our population, the Census Bureau projects that whites will drop below 50 percent by 2042.
In 1976, 90 percent of voters were white. In 2008, 74 percent were white, and it's estimated that this will drop to 70 percent in 2016.
Ninety percent of John McCain's support in 2008 was from white voters.
If the Republican Party is to have a future, it must reach non-white Americans, most of whom have been voting for Democrats.
Can this be done with success? Yes. And this is where the two challenges converge.
Not only do big-government policies and the moral relativism of Democrats not solve the unique problems of black and Hispanic communities, they make them worse. Blacks and Hispanics are in critical need of the traditional values of conservatism and the prosperity that can come only from capitalism.
Taking on these two big challenges – connecting free-market capitalism with traditional values, and outreach into non-white America – will secure a Republican and an American renaissance.
Now it's on to the Senate for approval: http://www.lifesitenews.com...
The Stupak-Pitts amendment to explicitly bar abortion funding passed rather handily, but some Catholic bloggers are worried that it will eventually get stripped out during reconciliation over the Senate and House versions. We'll see. One commentator has this to say:
Hey, "we" won a major battle here. Don't dismiss it. This is tremendous news! We showed the Democratic party, and namely the drum-tight facelift reject that they can NOT simply dictate policy to the American people, and least of all to Catholics living in America. The bill prohibits abortion coverage in both the public option and the "insurance exchange" (i.e. clearing house/money laundering scheme) so at present, there is no back door for abortion coverage. It's locked pretty tight. Don't you dare try to sell this moment short.
From this point on, we need to continue to be active, vigilant and steadfast in our faith. If the Democrats try to "sneak" abortion back into the bill, you bet your sweet bippy we will raise all holy hell and force their hand AGAIN.
There have been few moments these last few years where I have been truly proud of my church. This is sad, but true. And this is definitely one of them.
The gay marriage proponents sure are relentless, aren't they? Well, two can play this game. Just days after having their rear ends handed to them in Maine where the voters stunningly voted to repeal the law allowing gay marriages that the legislature imposed on them, New York's Gov. Paterson and his fellow Democrats apparently haven't learned a lesson: http://www.lifesitenews.com...
Thankfully one Democrat, Ruben Diaz, is bucking the party on this. Hopefully he succeeds in delaying the vote on this until next year when his fellow Dems will be forced to decide whether they want to imperil their re-election chances. Should he succeed, then I will toast him as well as celebrate my birthday that day by ordering a Reuben sandwich, making for a perfect day as his picture illustrates.
After finally getting around to watch a video shortie that a pro-life warrior gave me featuring an actor who starred in the movie "Bella," I had to let my blood stop boiling before I could post this to avoid lacing it with epithets.
I have to tell you that seeing graphic pictures of abortion or Holocaust victims are not even remotely as disturbing as seeing these video clips.
Frankly, I don't see any distinction between the barbaric insanity that is abortion and anything that the Nazis have done. This is anything but a simple "medical procedure." Those who refuse to see abortion for what it is are cowards; those who do but do not find it repulsive are cold-hearted animals. It's that simple.
Fortunately the video is available online in both English and Spanish for all to see: http://www.massmediamail.co...
Yep, just another thing that makes you go "hmmm." Sam Heath will find this interesting as I did, especially considering it was recently theorized that some particles are coming back from the future to keep the collider from discovering them: http://www.popsci.com/scien...
One of the jokes was that the particles may cause a janitor to trip over the collider's power cord just in time.
... just maybe our republic will be saved, the Culture of Death given a good shellacking and we won't have to face the "death panels" that Sarah Palin rightly warned us of (emphases as usual are mine):
In an exclusive interview with Creative Minority Report, former Senator Rick Santorum leveled criticism at both Senator Bob Casey and U.S. Catholic bishops for their stands in the current healthcare debate, even going so far as saying he was “appalled” by the statements of the USCCB.
Santorum said he’s “not surprised” that Casey, a self professed pro-life Catholic, has declined to take a stand against abortion in the healthcare debate. Casey recently told CNS that he refused to draw “a line in the sand” over abortion.
Santorum said that kind of response is typical of Casey. “If it is convenient for him to vote pro-life he’ll do it but he’ll put other issues above abortion,” said Santorum. “And I don’t think he hides that. I think he’s been very upfront about it.”
Santorum added that it shouldn’t be a surprise that so many Catholic politicians ignore what the Church is saying. He said that for too long dissent from the teaching of the Church was ignored by bishops. “You have examples from the Kennedys on down. The Kennedys and the Cuomos. It was made clear that you can dissent from the Church and still be a Catholic in good standing” he said. “For a long time many bishops in country didn’t say too much about it.”
Santorum said abortion is dissent from core teaching that should never be compromised on. He said the silence from the bishops over the years “confused the faithful as to what the church teachings were because they didn’t condemn it in any practical way.”
Santorum made it clear that Casey puts the goals of the Democratic Party over the goals of the pro-life movement. “There are some real true pro-life Democrats and I applaud them” said Santorum. “They’re in a difficult situation because they are part of a radical pro-abortion party. I say pro-abortion not pro-choice. And resisting the culture in that party is very difficult.”
Casey has voted pro-life on many bills but failed to on others. Maria Vitale, Education Director of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation said, “We are thankful for the times Senator Casey has voted pro-life and we’re disappointed when he does not.”
When contacted, Casey staffer John Richter said that Casey “favors” the current healthcare legislation. When asked whether abortion being in the bill gave the Senator pause, Richter answered, “Abortion’s not even mentioned in the bill.”
Santorum called that response “disingenuous.”
“They think pro-lifers are simpletons. That’s what they think of all pro-lifers - clinging to their guns and religion” said Santorum. “They treat you like you’re an idiot.”
Santorum pointed out that cancer treatments are also not explicitly named in the bill but that doesn’t mean that cancer patients won’t be treated.
Santorum’s words for Casey were tough but he had even tougher words for Catholic bishops. “I am appalled at the Catholic bishops,” said Santorum. “I commend them for drawing a line in the sand on abortion. But what they’ve suggested would do more damage than the abortion coverage.”
The USCCB has made strong statements against the healthcare bills because of the inclusion of abortion funding but have stated often that they would be in favor of the bill if that were excluded.
Santorum said socialized medicine would lead to "de facto euthanasia."
“This would be a foundational change in America's history that puts the government in control of people’s lives,” he warned.
Santorum warned that socialized medicine would inevitably lead to a devaluing of human life as it has in the other countries where it has been implemented. "The European healthcare system doesn’t make treatment readily available to people at end of life,” he said.
He pointed out that governments in charge of healthcare tend to look at treatments as “expenditures of public funds and they look for a return on their investment.”
He said preferential treatment will be spent on "useful lives," he said, putting the disabled and the elderly at risk.
Santorum said that socialized medicine would assuredly lead to "the onrush of the culture of death” and should be opposed by anyone who wishes America to foster a culture of life.
Hat tip to Matthew Archbold of the Creative Minority Report blog for once again tweaking the nose of the Culture of Death:
You know how often Hollywood calls itself "brave." It's by far the most overused adjective the night of the Oscars. I love when they call an actor "brave" or "fearless" for putting on twenty pounds for a role. Heck, I put on twenty pounds last year and nobody called me brave. They call me fat.
But they love facing down the "assault" of press releases from Christian groups. They eat it up when they are able to "stand up" in the face of a "barrage of criticism" from some evangelist group.
Well, to let you know how brave Hollywood really is, check out the brave director Roland Emmerich. In his new movie 2012 Emmerich shows the dome of St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican rolling on top of a crowd of churchgoers, bishops have the roof fall in on their mitred noggins. The arms of the Jesus the Redeemer statue in Rio De Janiero fall off right before the whole thing falls over and goes boom.
And Emmerich also decided to demolish something else...but he didn't. Wanna' guess why?
Yahoo reports:
For "2012," Emmerich set his sites on destroying the some biggest landmarks around the world, from Rome to Rio. But there's one place that Emmerich wanted to demolish but didn't: the Kaaba, the cube-shaped structure located in the center of Mecca. It's the focus of prayers and the site of the Hajj, the biggest, most important pilgrimage in Islam.
"Well, I wanted to do that, I have to admit," the filmmaker told scifiwire.com. "But my co-writer Harald [Kloser] said, 'I will not have a fatwa on my head because of a movie.' And he was right."
Emmerich went on: "We have to all, in the western world, think about this. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have ... a fatwa, and that sounds a little bit like what the state of this world is. So it's just something which I kind of didn't [think] was [an] important element, anyway, in the film, so I kind of left it out."
He kinda' left it out. But it was crucial to the story to have a bunch of bishops crushed?
I love the part where he generalizes his own cowardice into a worldwide problem. Now, of course, he's right in the sense that "2012" is not worth dying over. It's not even worth the ten dollars it would cost to see it.
But the next time Hollywood thinks about praising itself itself for being brave in the face of a William Donahue press release from The Catholic League, just spare me.
I'm so upset by this that I'm going to go bravely eat some hot dogs and bravely get fat.
I don't think the Prop. 71 backers quite had this in mind when they passed the initiative. For one thing, there may be some wondering whether this would curb the barbaric practice of slaughtering embryos so that others may live.
Unfortunately, there are some politicians who, as the father of the wheelchair-bound man pictured below says, "are putting us back in the stone age," and it's not those on the right. Try those on the left, who seem wanting to regress to the days of the Mayans and continue to offer bloody sacrifices to Quetzalcoatl.
I pray and hope that the resounding successes of adult stem-cell research will drive a stake into the heart of the foul-smelling beast otherwise known as embryonic stem-cell research.
Published: November 4, 2009
California Stem-cell Institute Makes First Development Grants
10 of 14 Go to Adult Stem-Cell Research
Five years after the passage of Proposition 71, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine is awarding grants for stem-cell research targeted at clinical applications. In what both the San Diego Union-Tribune and Knight Science Journalism Tracker are calling an “irony,” ten of the 14 grants are going to researchers working with adult stem-cells.
 On Thursday, October 29, the New York Times reported: “In a tacit acknowledgment that the promise of human embryonic stem cells is still far in the future, California’s stem cell research program on Wednesday awarded grants intended to develop therapies using mainly other, less controversial cells.
“The $230 million in grants awarded Wednesday to California universities and companies represent a big step toward moving stem cells from basic research toward application in treating diseases like cancer and AIDS. Grant recipients are supposed to have a therapy ready for initial human testing in four years.
“But only four of the 14 projects involve embryonic stem cells. The others will use so-called adult stem cells or conventional drugs intended to kill cancer stem cells, which are thought to give rise to tumors.
“The grants thus represent a departure from the program’s original mission. California voters approved the 10-year, $3 billion effort in 2004 largely to get around restrictions on embryonic stem cell research imposed by the administration of President George W. Bush.”
The San Francisco Chronicle covered the story as well:
“Most of the projects approved Wednesday do not involve embryonic stem cells, but researchers said that even now, after years of study and under a new administration, funding for all kinds of stem cell research is difficult to secure.
"There is a very serious shortage for all stem-cell research," said Dr. Irving Weissman, director of Stanford University's Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. The state agency "allows us to do research that the federal government won't fund."
Other adult stem-cell developers are not waiting around for government funding, however. On the same day the CIRM announced its grants, the Associated Press reported:
“Stem cell drug developer Aldagen Inc. on Wednesday filed a registration for a planned initial public offering, and valued the potential IPO at $80.5 million.
“The Durham, N.C., company is testing a variety of treatments made with adult stem cells, including drugs designed to improve therapies for metabolic disease and drugs that treat blocked blood vessels….After the IPO, its shares will trade on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol "ALDH."
There is another irony to this story. While treatments using adult stem cells are showing remarkable results worldwide, most of these treatments are not available in the U.S. Right now, the greatest impediment to the accessibility of adult stem-cell treatments may be the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has classed a person’s own stem cells, taken from a person’s own body and multiplied, as a drug. This action caused some American doctors to form a group called the American Stem Cell Therapy Association. The group opposes the FDA’s position that adult stem cells are a “drug,” and thus must be regulated as such. “The FDA’s position against someone using their own stem cells is taking it too far,” said Dr. Frank Falco, a group member.
The FDA’s position has real-world consequences. On October 12, the Pittsburg, Kansas Morning Sun had an article about Justin Pryor, who was in an auto accident in 2008. Mr. Pryor suffered a broken neck and T-12 vertebrae. He is currently paralyzed from the waist down. This month Pryor will be traveling to Cologne, Germany to visit the Xcell Center which specializes in adult stem-cell treatments of injuries such as his. Xcell reports that of 110 spinal cord injury patients who have undergone Pryor’s procedure, nearly 60 percent experienced improvement.
The Morning Sun continued: “Justin and his father both believe that the procedure Justin will receive next month, which uses solely adult stem cells taken from his own body, should be legalized in the U.S. ‘The politicians in this country are putting us back in the stone age,’ Chester (Pryor) said. “The stem cells Justin is going to receive in Germany are going to come from his own body. Now you tell me why the politicians here will not allow that in this country.’”
© California Catholic Daily 2009. All Rights Reserved.
My faith in a society that values marriage and the family as ordained by God long before government came into being has been restored, thanks to yesterday's election results, including the repeal of Maine's same-sex law that was imposed on the state by the legislators: http://www.calcatholic.com/...
Now that gay marriage proponents are 0 for 31 in deciding this issue at the ballot box and may have only barely won an initiative to expand civil union benefits in Washington, Catholic League's Bill Donohue thinks it's time for them "to pack it in": http://www.catholicleague.c...
Here's a big shout out to the voters in Maine for doing the right thing. I should warn them that there may be some repercussions of the kind that California's Yes on 8 backers have experienced: http://www.calcatholic.com/...
And last, but not the least, a rousing applause for the indomitable Brian Brown of the National Organization of Marriage for helping to pull off another victory. Here's his victory speech:
WE DID IT!
By a 53-47 margin, voters in Maine won a decisive and historic victory for marriage by passing Question 1!
But each and everyone of you, who volunteered or donated to Stand for Marriage Maine, who forwarded an e-mail to a friend or neighbor, or who simply prayed fervently for the institution of marriage--today is your victory!
The importance of the win in Maine nationally can not be overstated.
Same-sex marriage activists saw Maine as their best chance to win a direct marriage vote. They thought it would stop the momentum we gained by passing Proposition 8 dead in its tracks--and reverse it.
They thought, in their words, it "would break" our movement.
Instead, for the first time in history, the voters of a state have overturned the legislative enactment of same-sex marriage. New York, New Jersey and other states considering redefining marriage will now have to confront this blunt fact:
The voters in a deep New England state have now joined 30 other states in directly affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
If we can win in Maine, we can win anywhere.
From the beginning, NOM saw how high the stakes were in Maine. That's why we devoted such resources to the effort. We are the single largest donor to Stand for Marriage Maine. We gave nearly $1.8 million, emptying our bank account because of the serious needs in Maine.
Even so, we were outspent 2-1, given little chance to win in the media, and saw our ads pilloried by Maine's elites.
But we kept fighting, kept hope alive, and continued to focus on our message--same-sex marriage has clear consequences.
And we won.
In my capacity as an executive committee member of Stand for Marriage Maine, I have had the privilege of getting to know and work with campaign chairman Mark Mutty and Rev. Bob Emrich. Both have been tireless defenders of marriage and deserve our nation's thanks.
Bishop Richard Malone of the Diocese of Portland provided invaluable leadership, inspiring not only the Catholic faithful, but voters across denominational lines.
Frank Schubert and Jeff Flint of Schubert Flint Public Affairs, masterfully guided Question 1 to victory. They are simply the best at what they do, and our movement in Maine and around the country would not have seen these victories without their efforts.
NOM's president, Maggie Gallagher has been willing to fly at the drop of the hat to Maine (or anywhere else for that matter!) to do whatever necessary to protect marriage.
I write all of this quickly this morning, after a late election night watching returns in Portland, Maine. I'm sitting outside an old stone church in downtown Portland. It is a chilly, breezy, day with the sun shining bright, and the Casco Bay bridge in the distance.
An ideal fall day in New England. An ideal day for marriage in our country.
Faithfully,
Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
Yeah, baby, way to sack the opponent! The news of the polls showing Doug Hoffman of the Conservative Party surging to a comfortable lead in the wake of the confused liberal and GOP candidate's exit from the race for a New York congressional seat is quite revealing, considering she threw her support to the Democratic candidate. Hoffman will take those voters, thank you very much: http://www.lifesitenews.com...
The libs had their fun in hijacking and screwing up the Democratic Party. Now it's the traditionalists' turn to do the same for the GOP. As for the mushy middle-grounders, you're on your own. On the other hand, if you somehow manage to keep control of the GOP, we'll gladly start our own and watch you drown in the seas of relativism.
HOFFMAN! CHRISTIE! MCDONNELL!
Get ready for a trifecta of a thumping tomorrow in what will be a referendum on our undocumented president.
Hat tip to the Creative Minority Report for this post:
KBTX is reporting an amazing story that an executive director at a local Planned Parenthood has resigned after viewing an ultrasound of an abortion procedure.
Abby Johnson had worked at PP for about eight years.
"I just thought I can't do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that's it," said Johnson.
She handed in her resignation October 6. Johnson worked as the Bryan Planned Parenthood Director for two years.
According to Johnson, the non-profit was struggling under the weight of a tough economy, and changing it's business model from one that pushed prevention, to one that focused on abortion.
"It seemed like maybe that's not what a lot of people were believing any more because that's not where the money was. The money wasn't in family planning, the money wasn't in prevention, the money was in abortion and so I had a problem with that," said Johnson.
Johnson said she was told to bring in more women who wanted abortions, something the Episcopalian church goer recently became convicted about.
"I feel so pure in heart (since leaving). I don't have this guilt, I don't have this burden on me anymore that's how I know this conversion was a spiritual conversion."
Amazing. Johnson now joins the Coalition for Life members who pray outside the building.
So Planned Parenthood is telling local directors to ditch family planning and concentrate on abortions. But remember, they're not pro-abortion. Nobody's pro-abortion, right?
Also remember all that taxpayer money that's going towards Planned Parenthood for "family planning services" but supposedly not for abortion, well what do they say now that a PP director is saying that PP is downplaying family planning and pushing abortions?
Now one interesting note to watch is that Planned Parenthood had issued a temporary restraining order on Johnson which I'm unsure what that's about.
Rochelle Tafolla, a Planned Parenthood spokesperson issued the following statement: "We regret being forced to turn to the courts to protect the safety and confidentiality of our clients and staff, however, in this instance it is absolutely necessary."
Could it be that perhaps Johnson knows something that Planned Parenthood doesn't want out?
According to the news, the order contends that Planned Parenthood "would be irreparably harmed by the disclosure of certain information."
A pro-life movement had flown under my radar until yesterday when World Net Daily gave top billing to a report about efforts under way in 32 states to enact a statute or amend the constitution to define fetuses as persons in an attempt to outlaw abortion: http://www.wnd.com/index.ph... The most telling passage:
According to the movement, if every unborn baby is defined as a person, each baby will be legally guaranteed the same right to life as all Americans.
"We believe – and a lot of the justices on the Supreme Court agree with us – that there is no right to privacy that would allow abortion," Garcia Jones said. "Since it's not mentioned directly in the 14th Amendment, we could use the 10th Amendment and the states' rights to police themselves and to pass laws regulating morality and health and safety to regulate abortion so it's not permitted. Basically it would be treated the same way as a homicide, where a state can regulate how they punish it and how they try to prevent it, but they could never allow it."
Tonight I went to a celebration marking the last day of the 40 Days for Life campaign at the Lifesavers Ministry across the street from the local abortion clinic. It was well-attended, so much so that the street was blocked off. A good time was had by all, with a free barbecue served up by my fellow Knights of Columbus from another parish, powerful testimonies and music. A booth was set up to sign up folks for the next 40 Days campaign in the spring during Lent as well as to recruit signature gatherers to get the petition to amend California's Constitution to establish personhood on the ballot: http://personhoodcalifornia...
Such initiatives have been launched only in seven states so far, with Nevada being the latest one, but more should quickly follow. I'd guess the odds of success would not be good, but I could pleasantly be proven wrong. The Catholic bishops haven't been exactly supportive of the personhood movement, but neither have they frowned on individual Catholics working for its passage: http://www.lifesitenews.com... The bishops, however, were given hell by a fiesty pro-life giant:
"It's a political, gutless position," said Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, in a report by the Denver Post. "As a Catholic, it's the most scandalous thing I've ever heard. I can't believe that any bishop wouldn't want to be out in the front lines helping the petitioners. The sanctity of life is a fundamental teaching of the Catholic Church."
Perhaps the caricature of Catholic priests carrying out inquisitions against women explains their being gun-shy on abortion. Thankfully Judie won't put up with such nonsense.
Considering the resounding successes of restricting marriages to one man and one woman, it's only natural that right-thinking folks progress to another issue of profound importance, one that would fulfill the dream of the civil rights movement.
For those hung over from the Halloween partying, it's time to sober up and start reflecting on what the rest of Hallowtide entails, as Christine of the Laudem Gloriae blog tells us: http://extremecatholic.blog...
Indeed, today is All Saints Day and tomorrow is All Souls Day. As Christine mentions, not only are we to pray for the dead, but meditate on what we should be doing to avoid hell ourselves. Actually it would be good to ponder the last four things--death, judgment, heaven, hell--as constantly as possible.
Unlike what some of you may think, I actually took the family out to celebrate Halloween at a church festival and for some trick-or-treating around the neighborhood at a friend's house where a party was held. Returning home, I tuned in to the Catholic network EWTN, which aired the hourlong program "What Every Catholic Needs to Know About Hell." I have to say that the statements made by the panelists were quite jarring, to say the least. Indeed, what you don't know about it can hurt you. It certainly hasn't gone out of fashion. Luckily, you won't need to fork over the $20 to buy a DVD of it to see for yourself. You can watch the five-part series on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Among the pointers: that practically every page of the New Testament keys on the doctrine of hell and that Christ mentioned hell 28 times and eternal punishment 90 times. Spirit Daily has an excellent article on this subject as well: http://www.spiritdaily.net/...
As you can see, this is what life, pardon the pun, boils down to.
|
