How Can Someone be a Catholic and yet Vote for Obama?

The following is an editorial that my daughter's grandmother sent to me from Maryland, Thank You, Dolly!
I am putting this on my blog for all those who have friends & family members who claim to be Catholic, but are voting for Obama, despite his records and affiliations. Despite the over 100 Bishops who have come together to emphasize that voting for a pro-choice, abortion on demand candidate is against our Catholic teaching. It boggles my mind to wonder HOW someone can even consider voting for man who has voted 4 times in favor of INFANTICIDE. How can someone vote for a man whose spiritual advisor is Jeremiah Wright, financial advisor is Tony Rezko, and who launched his political career from unrepented domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. His inexperience, associations and record SHOULD be enough, but, sadly it is not. This editorial attempts to address these questions ~ that are just outright unanswerable ~ However, someday, they will have to answer to God. In the meantime, let's remind ourselves of what Jesus said while hanging on the Cross, "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do." To those of us who are anxious because of these realities, He also says, "Be at peace and know that I AM GOD!"
God Bless! ~ Georgia
"I'm confused. What's with the "Catholics for Obama" signs that I see around the country? How can someone be Catholic and yet be for Sen. Barack Obama?
Has the Catholic Church changed its longstanding opposition to abortion? I think not. Many churches around the country display little crosses representing the number of abortions that are performed in America each day. And some Catholic church lawns prominently advertise the CareNet Pregnancy Center, an organization committed to providing alternatives to abortion. Not to mention San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer calling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the carpet recently about her comments on abortion. And Cardinal Edward Egan of New York went so far as to say that anyone who defends abortion should not be leading in a civilized democracy. So, obviously, the Catholic Church hasn't budged.
Maybe Sen. Obama has reversed his unqualified support for abortion. Unfortunately, the evidence suggests otherwise. In July 2007, Barack Obama vowed to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund: "The FIRST thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." This legislation, co-sponsored by Sen. Obama, would annihilate every single state law limiting or regulating abortion, including the federal ban on partial-birth abortion. He even voted against banning partial-birth abortion in October 2007. (**Also, he voted 4x against providing medical care to little babies who are born accidentally from a botched abortion. In other words, Barack Obama is Pro-INFANTICIDE!**Georgia Kijesky added this) On top of that, Sen. Obama's overall record has earned him 100 percent ratings from pro-abortion groups such as NARAL, Pro-Choice America, and the National Organization for Women. If he has changed his opinion on abortion, he hasn't told anyone.
Apparently neither the Catholic Church nor Sen. Obama has altered their stance on the abortion issue.
So how can some Catholics still be for Obama? Have they decided that the Catholic Church is wrong when it comes to abortion, but right on other matters? But if you disagree with the church on such a fundamental issue, why contiune to call yourself Catholic at all? Call yourself something else instead.
Maybe Catholics for Obama haven't actually thought out the issue enough from a Catholic (or even Biblical) perspective to grasp that God created our inmost being and knit us together in our mother's womb. And if God begins life at conception, it is cerainly not our place to destroy it out of convenience.
Maybe Catholics for Obama have decided that it doesn't really matter what they believe or how they vote at all, which betrays an even deeper disconnect between what they do in church on Sundays and how they live the rest of the week.
Or maybe they think that God simply doesn't care how they vote, or if He does, that He will overlook it on the day of Judgement. But if we will give an account then for every careless word we speak, surely we will give an account for how we voted.
Either way, it is a shame, because their votes could indeed have made a difference."
~ John Harris, Lexington Park, editorial from "The Enterprise"

Archbishop Chaput on Douglas Kmiec's book,"Can a Catholic Support Him? Asking the Big Question about Barack Obama"

click here to read article in its entirety

What Barack Obama Does NOT Want YOU to SEE or KNOW

This election is not about Democrat vs. Republican, Rich vs. Poor, or Black vs. White, it is about LIFE vs. DEATH

Obama Argued AGAINST the Supreme Court Decision Gonzales v. Carhart

Washington DC, Feb 28, 2008 / 06:15 am (CNA).- On Wednesday a full transcript of Democrat presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama’s July 2007 speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund in which he vigorously defended legalized abortion became available.

In the July 17 speech, Obama attacked the Supreme Court decision that upheld the federal partial-birth abortion ban and the nomination of Supreme Court justices who favor overturning Roe v. Wade. In the speech the senator said, "There will always be people, many of goodwill, who do not share my view on the issue of choice. On this fundamental issue, I will not yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield."

Obama based his speech around the question, “What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?”

He specifically argued against the Supreme Court decision Gonzales v. Carhart, which upheld restrictions on partial-birth abortion.

“For the first time in Gonzales versus Carhart,” Obama said, “the Supreme Court held—upheld a federal ban on abortions with criminal penalties for doctors. For the first time, the Court’s endorsed an abortion restriction without an exception for women’s health. The decision presumed that the health of women is best protected by the Court—not by doctors and not by the woman herself. That presumption is wrong.”

He warned abortion supporters that the partial-birth abortion ban should not be construed as an isolated effort, saying it was wrong to presume the law was “not part of a concerted effort to roll back the hard-won rights of American women.”

Obama said the decision had encouraged an Alabama lawmaker to introduce a measure to ban all abortions. “With one more vacancy on the Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a woman’s fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe versus Wade and that is what is at stake in this election,” Obama claimed.

The senator said he had a long tradition of support for legalized abortion, citing his efforts in the Illinois State Senate and his classes as a law professor. “I have worked on these issues for decades now,” he said. “I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law. Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality.”

The dissent of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg in Gonzales v. Carhart won praise from Obama while Justice Anthony Kennedy, who spoke for the majority, was held up for ridicule.

“The only thing more disturbing than the decision was the rationale of the majority. Without any hard evidence, Justice Kennedy proclaimed, ‘It is self-evident that a woman would regret her choice.’ He cited medical uncertainty about the need to protect the health of pregnant women. Even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists found no such uncertainty. Justice Kennedy knows many things, my understanding is he does not know how to be a doctor,” Obama said.

On the topic of judicial appointments, Obama reaffirmed his opposition to the confirmation of Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito, who are believed to be hostile to the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

Obama also depicted his opponents as divisive, saying, “They want us to believe that there’s nothing that unites us as Americans—there’s only what divides us. They’ll seek out the narrowest and most divisive ground.”

Senator Obama said he was “absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties,” saying it was “time to turn the page.”

“We’re tired about arguing about the same ole’ stuff,” he continued. And I am convinced we can win that argument. If the argument is narrow, then oftentimes we lose.”

He said abortion advocates should emphasize their support for women to have the “same chances” as men.

Laura Echevarria, the political writer and former National Right to Life Committee spokeswoman who transcribed the July speech, criticized Obama’s remarks.

"Many Americans see Barack Obama as a kind and compassionate candidate," she said. "However, Mr. Obama's compassion does not extend to our most vulnerable members of society- -unborn children."

Catholic Bishop Causes Stir: Don't Vote for Pro-Abortion Candidates, Period!

Scranton, PA (LifeNews.com) -- A Catholic bishop in Pennsylvania has perhaps gone further than any other Catholic leader in the nation with a new statement saying Catholics shouldn't vote for any candidate who is pro-abortion. The statement has implications for the presidential race with a clear contrast between the candidates.

Scranton Bishop Joseph F. Martino showed up unexpectedly at a parish forum in his diocese and said he was upset that the letter he authored saying not to vote for pro-abortion candidates wasn't a part of the discussion.

Martino surprised the audience by saying that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops doesn't go far enough in laying out Catholic policy vis-a-vis voting priorities.

The bishops have said, in their document “Faithful Citizenship” that "“a Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion" if the voter is intending to support abortion. It says pro-abortion candidates can only be supported for proportionate reasons -- something Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput has said doesn't exist.

Bishop Martino went further and took issue with the USCCB statement, which was handed out to everyone at the meeting, and complained no one received his letter.

“No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese,” said Martino. “The USCCB doesn't speak for me.”

“The only relevant document ... is my letter,” he said. “There is one teacher in this diocese, and these points are not debatable.”

The letter indicates that abortion is more important than any other political issue.

“Health care, education, economic security, immigration, and taxes are very important concerns. Neglect of any one of them has dire consequences as the recent financial crisis demonstrates," it says. "However, the solutions to problems in these areas do not usually involve a rejection of the sanctity of human life in the way that abortion does."

"National Right to Life reports that 48.5 million abortions have been performed since 1973. One would be too many. No war, no natural disaster, no illness or disability has claimed so great a price," it concludes. “No social issue has caused the death of 50 million people. This is madness, people."

After Bishop Martino's comments, most of the members of the audience gave him a standing ovation, but about one-fourth of the audience left afterwards.

by Steven Ertelt

LifeNews.com Editor

October 22, 2008

In His Own Words:Barack Obama expresses his opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act

Make an on-line slideshow at www.OneTrueMedia.com

Division in Scranton, PA ~ an Interview based upon N.Y.Times article w/Archbishop Chaput

"What is at Stake," In His Own Words (53 seconds)

Roving Reporter #32: Norma McCorvey: Roe No More

Jane Roe is Roe No More

Her name is Norma McCorvey. She likes to be called, "Miss Norma," and is unapologetically Roman Catholic. As the former "poster-girl" for abortion who, in the words of a friend, "jumped off the poster and into the arms of Christ," Norma truly began to live her life in 1995 when she became baptized and gave her life to God. She literally moved next door from the abortion clinic at which she was working to the national offices of the prominent pro-life organization, Operation Rescue. Shortly after her conversion in 1997, Miss Norma founded Roe No More Ministry to share with the world what she knows about "choice". She knows the truth of Roe v. Wade and the lie upon which it all started. She is now dedicated to reversing what she was a part of 35 years ago.

The Truth of Roe v. Wade

The Roe vs. Wade case took three years of trials to reach the United States Supreme Court. In the meantime, McCorvey had not aborted, but had given birth to the baby in question. In the case, she claimed that her pregnancy was the result of rape. She now claims that to have been untrue.

In the 1980s, McCorvey revealed herself to be the "Jane Roe" of the famous case, and that she had been the "pawn" of two young and ambitious lawyers (Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee) who were looking for a plaintiff with whom they could challenge the Texas state law prohibiting abortion.

About Roe No More Ministry

Although Miss Norma is Catholic, she prides herself in maintaining an unequivocally non-denominational ministry. She is a firm believer in the fact that as Christians, we need to come together and spread the Good News of life ecumenically as opposed to trying to convert each other.

Roe No More Ministry's primary service is through Miss Norma's public speaking. Since its' inception in 1997, she has traveled to three countries and over 40 states, sharing her story at rallies, with church congregations, civic organizations, politicians, university students and clergy.

Its' mission is to spread the truth that Roe v. Wade is not liberation for women, but was a case based on lies and deceit. Having worked inside abortion clinics, she knows, not only what really happens behind closed doors, but also what the women go through.

Central to Miss Norma's message is her unparalleled support of Crisis Pregnancy solutions. She recently commented that,
"instead of supporting organizations such as Planned Parenthood with taxpayer money, we should support local Crisis Pregnancy Centers who provide women with options other than killing their children...Women need to be fully informed...believe me, I've seen first-hand how inadequate the counseling by abortion providers really is."

In January, 1998, Miss Norma testified before a Senate Subcommittee stating:
"I saw procedure rooms where sanitation and hygiene were after-thoughts. I worked with a doctor that operated on women while he was barefoot...but the most terrible of all, I saw women who were emotionally and physically scarred by their visit to an abortion clinic. They often came asking us if it was a baby, and more often than not, they were lied to, and told, 'No, it was not a baby.'"

In the end, Miss Norma's message is about love and forgiveness. Ultimately, what is most unique about her and her mission is that she knows something far greater than herself. She knows God. And because of all of this, Jane Roe is, in fact, Roe No More.

Bishop Soto stuns National Homosexual Ministries Conference

(For the complete text of the Bishop's speech, see "It is Sinful," published on the Diocese of Sacramento's website, Sept. 26, 2008)
When two Catholics from Southern California learned that Sacramento Coadjutor Bishop Jaime Soto was to be the keynote speaker at the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries conference in Long Beach on Sept. 18, 2008 they decided to attend themselves to see and hear the talk in person. They say what they witnessed was a bishop who “courageously but gently” gave a clear presentation of Church teaching on sexuality.

After California Catholic Daily reported on Bishop Soto’s plans to attend and speak at the conference (“Birds of a feather?” Sept. 15, 2008), many readers expressed disapproval or worry over how to interpret the soon-to-be Bishop of Sacramento’s decision. Bishop Soto will take over the diocese from retiring Bishop William Weigand on Nov. 30. The National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries, based in Berkeley, is a network of local ministries that has the reputation of taking, at best, an ambiguous stance on the moral character of homosexuality and homosexual acts.

But there was nothing ambiguous about Bishop Soto’s remarks to the group. “Sexual relations between people of the same sex can be alluring for homosexuals, but it deviates from the true meaning of the act and distracts them from the true nature of love to which God has called us all,” Bishop Soto said. “For this reason, it is sinful. Married love is a beautiful, heroic expression of faithful, life-giving, life-creating love. It should not be accommodated and manipulated for those who would believe that they can and have a right to mimic its unique expression."

At least five members of the audience walked out during the bishop’s address. When he finished speaking, there was general silence -- with only a very small number applauding.

The chairman of the conference then announced that the bishop would answer questions at a reception that would be held in another room. That led to widespread expressions of disapproval from members of the audience, who said they wanted to be able to express their responses immediately. It was agreed that those who wanted to speak would line up. The bishop was told twice by the chairman that he was free to leave if he wanted -- or to stay and listen. Bishop Soto stayed and sat quietly listening to every response.

A series of about eight speakers came to the microphone to express their unhappiness with what the bishop had said -- and what they felt he had not said. One woman said, in essence, "We know what the Church says. What we wanted you to talk about is the value of our lived experience as lesbian women and gay men."

Two speakers -- one man and one woman -- thanked the bishop for his address and voiced their agreement with what he had to say.

While the audience members were responding to the bishop’s remarks, a board member of the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries came up to one of the tables in the room and said, "On behalf of the board, I apologize. We had no idea Bishop Soto was going to say what he said."

Risk It!

Are You an Open-Minded Free Thinker? If so, watch this!

Sing A Little Louder

"I lived in Germany during the Nazi holocaust. I considered myself a Christian. I attended church since I was a boy. We had heard the stories of what was happening to the Jews, but like most people today in this country, we tried to distance ourselves from it. After all, what could we do to stop it? A railroad track ran behind our small church. Each Sunday morning we would hear the whistle from a distance and then the clacking of the wheels moving over the track. We became disturbed when one Sunday we noticed cries coming from the train as it passed by. We grimly realized that the train was carrying Jews. They were like cattle in those cars! Week after week that train whistle blew. We would dread to hear the sound of those old wheels because we knew that the Jews would begin to cry out to us as they passed our church. It was so terribly disturbing! We could do nothing to help these poor miserable people, yet their screams tormented us. We knew exactly what time that whistle would blow, and we decided that to keep from being so disturbed by the cries we would start singing our hymns. By the time the train came rumbling past our church, we were singing at the top of our voices. If some of the screams reached our ears, we would just sing a little louder until we couldn't hear them. Years have passed and no one talks about it much anymore, but I still hear that train whistle in my sleep. I can still hear them crying our for help. God forgive all of us who called ourselves Christians, yet did nothing.
Now, so many years later, I see it happening all over again in America. God forgive you as Americans for blocking out the screams of millions of your own children. The holocaust is hear. The response is the same as it was in my country--SILENCE!"
-Anonymous-

The Weight of One Issue

Wow! I cannot begin to tell you how excited I am to finally be a part of the technologically advanced world of blogging! Most importantly, I am delighted to share my love for my Catholic faith and passion for the Pro-Life cause by spreading the good news of the Gospel of life.
I promise to provide factual and updated information on the latest news, events and issues that are relevent to Moms For Life, so together we can create a culture of life.
Thanks to the advice of my dear friend Deb, I decided to launch my new blog with my 1st official publication from my local newspaper, the Scranton-Times, on September 28, 2008:

"Recently, the New York Times published an article about one issue that is causing great division among Scranton voters, namely, abortion. Having been no stranger to the question, "How can you be a one-issue voter, "

I propose the following questions:

What if a politician were to vow to put an end to the health care crisis by making it possible for all Americans to receive affordable health care? What if he vowed to end the war in Iraq by bringing our troops home, using them to secure our borders? What if he vowed to put an end to the energy crisis by drilling here in our country, which would lower gas prices? What if he vowed to put an end to the economic crisis, lowering taxes, and creating more jobs? What if he vowed to create peaceful diplomacy throughout the world?

Now, consider this: What if this same politician vowed to legalize child pornography?

Clearly, one intrinsically evil issue far outweighs many other issues under debate."