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"
Friday, October 31, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
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
Friday, October 24, 2008
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."
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."
Thursday, October 23, 2008
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Obama's Pro-Abortion Record
100% of funds raised go directly to Pro-Life efforts
This is, by far, the BEST prayer book I have ever read!
Not just a prayer book for teens...but for people of all ages! You will LOVE it! Order your copy TODAY!
Dedicated to Our Lady of Guadalupe
Patroness of the Americas, Intercessor for the Pre-born
Web Pages referring to this page
Link to this page and get a link back!
Chinese
French
German
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Spanish
