Abortion champion NARAL exempted from Andrew Cuomo’s lobby-disclosure laws

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo pushed hard to ensure that lobbying groups would have to disclose their donors, and bragged about the sunlight the law would bring.

Now the state government has exempted exactly one lobbying group from the ethics laws: NARAL, the leading lobbyist for legal abortion.

Read more

Secretary Sebelius will be blamed for the Catholic Church/HHS Mandate debacle and will step down.

Political Prediction by Doug Lawrence:

In the wake of over 40 coordinated federal lawsuits by various Catholic organizations, including the University of  Notre Dame, Barack “the Campaigner” Obama will apologize for Secretary Sebelius’ lack of due diligence in formulating the HHS contraception/abortion mandate and the subsequent “compromise” … accept her resignation … and then happily carry on with his campaign.

David Axelrod will tell Obama how and precisely when to do this.

Kathleen Sebelius will shortly turn up as the new president of NARAL Pro-Death America.

Mitt Romney’s response will be to smile awkwardly and apologize for something, too.

Kathleen Sebelius, the public, unrepentant, Catholic heretic, speaks in Chicago

“Forty percent of unplanned pregnancies end in those women seeking abortions,” Sebelius said, then grew sarcastic: “Wouldn’t you think that people who want to reduce the number of abortions would champion the cause of widely available, widely affordable contraceptive services? Not so much.”

Link

Obama administration plans massive abortion fundraiser in Chicago

President Barack Obama’s top health official, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, will host a massive fundraiser for one of the nation’s biggest pro-abortion organizations next month.

With Obama’s polling numbers looking grim, the Obama administration is already cozying up to pro-abortion groups to raise the financial and grassroots support he needs from liberal Democrats in order for the president to have a shot at winning his re-election bid next year. Earlier this week, the chief of staff to First Lady Michelle Obama was the keynote speaker at a NARAL event. Now, Sebelius is headlining a fundraiser for the organization.

Sebelius will be the featured speaker at the 17th annual “Power of Choice” luncheon NARAL is throwing in Chicago at The Standard Club in Chicago, Obama’s stomping grounds, on October 5. The event is clearly a big fundraiser for NARAL as tickets for anyone other than college students and young professionals start at $200 and top sponsorship levels range anywhere from $2,500 to $25,000.

Register your complaints with the management of the Standard Club. Phone #: 312-427-9100.

Link

General Manager’s Office
Steve Thompson, General Manager, ext. 5101 sthompson@stclub.org
Steve Stanke, Assistant General Manager, ext. 5001 sstanke@stclub.org

Shameful USCCB puff piece: How U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis’ Catholic faith “motivates” her – to promote abortion!

We get a description of the crucifix and statue of Mary Solis keeps in her office, and are told that she “sometimes attends Masses at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in downtown Washington.” There is also a detailed account of Solis’ many efforts on behalf of the poor, especially migrant workers, during her tenure as a congresswoman from California and then as labor secretary. Solis was the first woman to receive the prestigious John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, “for her work on environmental justice issues,” the article states.

However, this glowing account of a Catholic public servant fails to mention a couple facts about her time in office, including her 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America (and a corresponding 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee).

Read more

Editor’s note: Just one more reason to “deep-six” the USCCB.

“I know every facet of abortion,” he wrote. “I helped nurture the creature in its infancy by feeding it great draughts of blood and money; I guided it through its adolescence as it grew fecklessly out of control.”

“I am one of those,” as he later wrote, “who helped usher in this barbaric age,” and he spent the last 30 years of his life trying to atone for it.

His journey began with personal experience. Born in 1926, Nathanson was in medical school in Canada in 1949 when his girlfriend told him she was pregnant. Appropriating money from his father, he paid for her illegal abortion. The experience​—​and the desperate effort to justify what he had done​—​led him by the mid-1960s to become one of the nation’s most prominent advocates for legalized abortion.

Read more

NARAL Pro-Choice (Pro-Abortion, Pro-Death) America releases comprehensive voter’s guide.


Pro-lifers can use this guide to know who to vote AGAINST.

“Any church that could survive the ignominy of clergy who have disgraced it for 2,000 years must be divine.”

The Church Militant.

The late Robert Novak told me that he became a Catholic after reading the history of the Church. He decided to convert because, he says, any church that could survive the ignominy of clergy who have disgraced it for 2,000 years must be divine. Good point-and these two news items reaffirm Novak’s point.

Clerical Bubblehead No 1.

Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn has recorded a robo-call… going to every registered voter in a certain city council district… praising Democratic Assemblyman Vito Lopez. It doesn’t bother Bishop DiMarzio one whit that Lopez, a Catholic, has been endorsed by NARAL (National Abortion Rights League) and has sponsored a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in New York. The reason for the prelate’s warm praise: Lopez helped derail a bill that would have lifted the statute of limitations against pedophilia priests and other clergy accused of indecent acts. The bishop says he doesn’t call upon voters to reelect Lopez… who is facing a very tight squeeze for reelection… but he just wants to thank him on behalf of the Brooklyn diocese.

Clerical Bubblehead No. 2.

Santa Fe [N.M.] Archbishop Michael Sheehan told the National Catholic Reporter last week that he supported Notre Dame’s decision to confer an honorary degree on President Obama and further cannot understand the reason for what he called the “big scene” of protests against Obama’s address and honorary degree. “We don’t want to isolate ourselves from the rest of America by our strong views on abortion and the other things,” he said. What “other things?” Probably the items listed in the 10 commandments. He exhibited his further ignorance thusly: “We’d be like the Amish, you know, kind of isolated from society, if we kept pulling back because of a single issue.”

Both deserve the Thomas Cranmer Medal… named for the Archbishop of Canterbury [1489-1556] who processed the request of Henry VIII to the pope for a divorce from Catherine of Aragon and handed the Church to Henry as his plaything, designating him sovereign head of the Church of England. Unfortunately weasel Cranmer got caught between the switches and when Mary I, a Catholic, ascended the throne she took it rather hard that wily old Cranmer had renounced his and her faith and converted to Protestantism. So she locked him up and condemned him to death. Then Cranmer experienced a most nervous, jittery re-conversion to Catholicism. Then when he found out his re-conversion to Catholicism would do him no good, he… let’s see how one says this… re-re-re-converted to Protestantism. His head was lopped off by Bloody Mary (who was no more bloody than Henry) and… believe it or not… this weak vessel Cranmer was proclaimed a martyr to Anglicanism.

To both DiMarzio and Sheehan the Cranmer medal… with our salutations.

Read the whole article at TomRoeser.com

Catholic War Veterans Respond to Washington Governor’s Support for Naral and Abortion

cwvusa

ALEXANDRIA, VA: On May 18, 2009, Catholic Gov. Christine Gregoire of the state of Washington attended NARAL Pro-Choice America’s “Power of Choice Luncheon” fundraiser in Seattle.

NARAL (formerly known as the National Abortion Rights Action League) organized the event specifically to honor the leadership of their retiring Washington State Executive Director, Ms. Karen Cooper. During the event Gov. Gregoire is reported to have spoken very highly of Ms. Cooper for her work for NARAL promoting unrestricted abortion in the state of Washington and our country. Gov. Gregoire stated, “We are blessed to have had you as our great leader.” And “Women across the state can be proud of your advocacy.” She also made reference that there are many future unborn who will benefit from her (Ms. Cooper’s) leadership.

Today, the Catholic War Veterans of the U.S.A. want to ask Gov. Gregoire if being murdered is the “benefit” that these innocent unborn women and men (and quite possibly, future veterans) can look forward to as a result of NARAL’s lobbying efforts and her continued support? In time of war, Catholics are called with all other citizens to serve and defend the life of our nation.

In responding to this call, veterans are acutely aware of the meaning, hope, and value of every human life. We are deeply saddened by Gov. Gregoire’s continued support for abortion in the State of Washington and her continued public disregard for the teachings of our jointly held faith.

Read the article

Pro-death, pro-abortion forces fear rhetoric more than bullets

Nancy Keenan president of NARAL-Pro-Choice America, said Roeder’s comments “continue to escalate that kind of activity, that kind of violence. Quite honestly, I think it’s imperative for anti-choice groups to tone down that rhetoric and keep the more extreme elements in their movement form copying Scott Roeder.”

Read the article

PELOSI DENIES CATHOLICISM OPPOSES ABORTION

August 25, 2008

PELOSI DENIES CATHOLICISM OPPOSES ABORTION

On yesterday’s NBC-TV show, “Meet the Press,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked to comment on when life begins. Here is what she said: “I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition.”

When Tom Brokaw told her that the Catholic Church “feels very strongly” that life begins at conception, Pelosi said, “I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the Church, this is an issue of controversy.”

Catholic League president Bill Donohue responded as follows:

“Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: ‘Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.’ It also says, ‘Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.’ Looks like Pelosi didn’t study the subject long enough. But not to worry: We are sending her a copy of Catholicism for Dummies today (the Catechism is like maybe a bit advanced).

“Whether Joe Biden is as ignorant of what his religion teaches remains to be seen. What is not in doubt is the enthusiasm which NARAL showed when he was selected to join the ticket. The radical pro-abortion group was delighted, as were the radical pro-abortion delegates to the Democratic convention: as reported in today’s New York Times, 64 percent of Americans reject abortion-on-demand, yet only 23 percent of the delegates do. It is only fitting, then, that NARAL’s president will speak today at the Convention and Planned Parenthood’s president will speak tomorrow.

“So there we have it: the man running for president on the Democratic ticket supports selective infanticide, his running mate is a pro-abortion Catholic, the delegates are wildly out of step with Americans on abortion and the Speaker of the House hasn’t a clue what her religion teaches on the subject.”

August 27, 2008

 PELOSI MISFIRES AGAIN AT CATHOLIC CHURCH

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments today on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s continued dispute with the Catholic Church:

 “On August 24, Pelosi contested the fact that the Catholic Church has always been unequivocally opposed to abortion. After being roundly criticized by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and many individual bishops—led by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput—as well as ten Catholic congressmen, the Catholic League et al., Pelosi’s office admitted yesterday that ‘Catholic teaching is clear that life begins at conception.’ Unfortunately, after this confession of ignorance, the statement continued by offering the quip that ‘many Catholics do not ascribe to that view.’ The release also said she shared the view of St. Augustine on the subjects of abortion and ensoulment.

“Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Melbourne, Australia, wrote in his 1997 book, Issues of Faith and Morals, that St. Augustine ‘believed that the embryo was ensouled at 46 days. Nevertheless, he also believed that it was gravely wrong to kill a formed or unformed fetus.’ It is instructive to note that philosophical discussions about the soul, and research on embryology, continue to advance beyond the knowledge available in the 5th century. In any event, Pelosi will find no relief for her bizarre reasoning by citing St. Augustine, or any other Church Father.

“Nor does her argument gain strength by pointing out that not all Catholics agree with the Church on this subject. So what? There are plenty of Catholics living a life rife with sin that seek to justify their behavior by saying they disagree with the Church on the source of their delinquency. What the House Speaker doesn’t get is that the Church is no more a democracy than the Democratic and Republican parties are: none arrive at conclusions based on referenda. Moreover, in the instance of the Catholic Church, the Magisterium is not the functional equivalent of the DNC or the RNC.

“Maybe that’s the source of Pelosi’s confusion—she really doesn’t understand the difference between the teaching authority of the Catholic Church and the DNC.”

Obama: A Harsh Ideologue Hidden by a Feel-Good Image

Obama: A Harsh Ideologue

Hidden by a Feel-Good Image

 

By Rick Santorum
Posted: Thursday, February 28, 2008

ARTICLE
Philadelphia Inquirer  
Publication Date: February 28, 2008
American voters will choose between two candidates this election year. One inspires hope for a brighter, better tomorrow. His rhetoric makes us feel we are, indeed, one nation indivisible – indivisible by ideology or religion, indivisible by race or creed. It is rhetoric of hope and change and possibility. It’s inspiring. This candidate can make you just plain feel good to be American. The other candidate, by contrast, is one of the Senate’s fiercest partisans. This senator reflexively sides with the party’s extreme wing. There’s no record of working with the other side of the aisle. None. It’s basically been my way or the highway, combined with a sanctimoniousness that breeds contempt among those on the other side of any issue. Which of these two candidates should be our next president? The choice is clear, right? Wrong, because they’re both the same man – Barack Obama.

Granted, the first-term Illinois senator’s lofty rhetoric of bipartisanship, unity, hope and change makes everyone feel good. But it’s becoming increasingly clear that his grand campaign rhetoric does not match his partisan, ideological record. The nonpartisan National Journal, for example, recently rated Obama the Senate’s most liberal member. That’s besting some tough competition from orthodox liberals such as Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer.

John McCain’s campaign and conservative pundits have listed the numerous times in Obama’s short Senate career where he sided with the extremes in his party against broadly supported compromises on issues such as immigration, ethics reform, terrorist surveillance and war funding. Fighting on the fringe with a handful of liberals is one thing, but consider his position on an issue that passed both houses of Congress unanimously in 2002.

That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being “terminated” outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.

The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing “shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right” of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn’t intruding on Roe v. Wade.

Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn’t kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee’s chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.

Let’s be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby. Infanticide – I wonder if he’ll add this to the list of changes in his next victory speech and if the crowd will roar: “Yes, we can.”

How could someone possibly justify such a vote? In March 2001, Obama was the sole speaker in opposition to the bill on the floor of the Illinois Senate. He said: “We’re saying they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a 9-month child delivered to term. I mean, it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal-protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child.” So according to Obama, “they,” babies who survive abortions or any other preterm newborns, should be permitted to be killed because giving legal protection to preterm newborns would have the effect of banning all abortions.

Justifying the killing of newborn babies is deeply troubling, but just as striking is his rigid adherence to doctrinaire liberalism. Apparently, the “audacity of hope” is limited only to those babies born at full term and beyond. Worse, given his support for late-term partial-birth abortions that supporters argued were necessary to end the life of genetically imperfect children, it may be more accurate to say the audacity of hope applies only to those babies born healthy at full term.

Obama’s supporters say his rhetoric makes them believe again.

Is this the kind of change and leader you believe in?

Submitted by Nancy W.