The prevailing doctrinal chaos and confusion is not clarified by the 2nd Vatican Council; on the contrary, dissent takes inspiration from it and finds refuge in it.

The purpose of a Church Council is to declare the Faith in a way which can change over time only by increasing in depth and clarity. Vatican II did not do so, and thereby failed in its purpose.

Link

Editor’s note: Let’s not kid ourselves. It’s abundantly clear that Vatican II was and is a total disaster – very similar to the way the Supreme Court’s Row v Wade abortion decision was handed down, then swiftly and recklessly foisted upon an unsuspecting public. Both led to abortions on a massive scale: Abortions of faith and abortions of human lives.

Act in haste – repent at leisure!

Pope Paul VI’s idea of questioning if birth control is good or bad opened the door to questioning all Catholic doctrine and laid the groundwork for Roe v Wade.

birth-control

When Pope Paul VI later decided against birth control, bishops, priests, religious, theologians, teachers and Catholics went wild.

Read more

Editor’s note: This is a wide ranging article wherein the author makes the case that trying to change Catholic doctrine to fit “modern man” only leads to death and doom.

Today, President Obama praised Roe v Wade as a great moment in history for women.

“We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her constitutional right to privacy, including the right to reproductive freedom.  And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children. Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams.”

Link

Editor’s note: You don’t need to be a racist to oppose shameless promoters of death, like Barack Obama, the abortion president.

Notice that the word “abortion” is nowhere to be found in his statement. Perhaps Barack Obama isn’t totally shameless, after all!

Lone pro-life Democratic Congressman speaks at Chicago March for Life

U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski, a socially conservative Democrat who was joined onstage by Republican House colleague Peter Roskam, asked the crowd how many were not alive when the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade.

About a hundred hands shot up and cheers ensued.

“We know today that … science is with us, the truth is with us,” Lipinski said. “The pro-life movement continues to build, continues to grow — you are all a part of that. It is not just being against abortion; it is about embracing life.”

Text and video

Editor’s note: One positive note … this local rally has already received more media attention than the upcoming March in Washington, D.C. is likely to.

Three reasons Roe v. Wade will fall

The U.S. Supreme Court-imposed abortion-on-demand regime of Roe v. Wade will one day fall. Why?

Roe will buckle under the weight of reason. “As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible,” notes Edward Lazarus, former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun (author of Roe) and supporter of legalized abortion. The U.S. Constitution cannot plausibly or rationally be said to include a right to abortion that precludes states dealing with this issue. Even the Court itself, when narrowly upholding Roe in 1992 (in Planned Parenthood v. Casey), could appeal only to stare decisis (i.e., past decisions should be reaffirmed because they are past decisions) and to virtual nonsense about “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

Roe will buckle under the weight of democracy. The Court in Roe, without constitutional warrant, usurped the authority of the American people to determine abortion policy. This “exercise of raw judicial power,” as Justice Byron White put it, struck down the democratically-decided abortion laws of all 50 states and imposed a nationwide policy of abortion on demand whether the people like it or not. The radical extent of the Roe regime was not and has never been even remotely consistent with public opinion (polling on this question is often inaccurate, and ignorance of the extent of Roe is widespread). Roe has disenfranchised millions of Americans, fostering divisive cultural and political battles.

Finally, and most importantly, Roe will buckle under the weight of human rights. It decided that an entire class of innocent human beings must be excluded from legal protection and allowed to be killed for any reason. Roe, like Dred Scott v. Sandford before it, is profoundly unjust and contrary to the equal fundamental dignity and right to life of all members of the human family. And the consequences of the Court’s folly—55 million unborn human beings killed, many women (and men) hurt emotionally, psychologically, physically—have been nothing less than catastrophic.

Full text

The basic lines of ‘pro-choice’ rhetoric were sketched out by Catholic theologians, at the residence of America’s most famous Catholic family, nine years before the Roe v. Wade decision.

The Catholic role in repealing the laws on contraception is only part of the story. As Phil Lawler reported in his book, Faithful Departed: The Collapse of Boston’s Catholic Culture, the scheme to legalize abortion took place not in a candle-lit basement where Satanists celebrated black masses, but at the home of America’s leading Catholic family, the Kennedys.

In 1964, Lawler wrote, leftist Catholic priests Robert DrinanCharles Curran and other theologians convened at Hyannis Port, Mass., with the brain trust behind the Senate campaign of Robert F. Kennedy.  They concocted the teaching that abortion could be justified if it were the “lesser of two evils” and that “a blanket prohibition might be more harmful to the common good”  because political leaders might  “impose their own private views on public policy. …The skillful operatives of the Kennedy family would round up the votes to end restrictions on abortion and eventually provide public subsidies. The Jesuit theologians would provide protective cover” and sabotage Catholic teaching in the universities. “Thus, the basic lines of ‘pro-choice’ rhetoric were sketched out by Catholic theologians, at the residence of America’s most famous Catholic family, nine years before the Roe v. Wade decision.”

Read more

Justice Ginsburg talks legal technicalities while hundreds of thousands of babies continue to die

CHICAGO — One of the most liberal members of the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg could be expected to give a rousing defense of Roe v. Wade in reflecting on the landmark vote 40 years after it established a nationwide right to abortion.

Instead, Ginsburg told an audience Saturday at the University of Chicago Law School that while she supports a woman’s right to choose, she feels the ruling by her predecessors on the court was too sweeping and gave abortion opponents a symbol to target. Ever since, she said, the momentum has been on the other side, with anger over Roe fueling a state-by-state campaign that has placed more restrictions on abortion.

Read more