Clash of the Titan’s – Planned Parenthood versus the Catholic Church – The Senate Bill – Will Reid Cave to Progressive Pressure?

Catholic Bishops image christianandamerica.com

The House, overseen by Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, narrowly passed a version of a Health Care Reform Act, last Saturday night – what saved Speaker Pelosi – exclusion of federal funding for abortion. The Catholic Church played a pivotal role in the inclusion of the The Stupak amendment which was the only way to get those pro-life Democrats on board for passage of the bill.

Naral Support of Politicians - image life news

Now, that the Bill has moved to the Senate, Planned Parenthood is mustering its forces to make sure that the Senate Version does not include the “Stupak Amendment”. Additionally, the progressive, pro-abortion organization, NARAL, is begging its members to sign a petition to Harry Reid in order to stop inclusion of any pro-life (or anti-abortion) language in the Senate version. NARAL routinely endorsee Democrats who stand up for abortion , at the top of the list: Barack Obama. How much influence will the mulit-billion dollar abortion industry have in the Senate?

The proverbial jury is out on this one.

Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader is “pro-life”, and the Catholic church, with an estimated voting block of 70,000,000, which has in the past, almost exclusively voted for the Democrat in office, simply because, that candidate was a Catholic. From John Kerry to Harry Reid, the campaigns were taken from the street to the Church, until recently. Within the past few years, admonishments have come down on politicians who are Catholic and pro-abortion, from the Church.

Additionally, Reid who is considered "weak", has already indicated that the bill will not go to the floor much before December, possibly January or February of next year – he simply does not have the votes.

It remains to be seen, what influence, if any, the U.S. Catholic Bishops, bill bring to bear on the Senate version. That said, they are keenly aware of the efforst of Planned Parenthood and its affiliates, and somewhat dismissive of both. If the Stupak Amendment is included, it would represent the voices of both the Catholic voting bloc, along with other Christian lobbying groups that also lobbied those in the House.

Therefore, it will be the lobby with the greatest clout who wins this battle. Presidential candidate are routinely questioned on their pro-abortion credentials, regardless of the fact that a President can do little but comment on the subject, let alone enact any legislation. (That is a rarity in most Congressional or Senate Races, with those very candidates showing up at local church events.) That legislation must come from Congress – and at the present time, congressional members are caught between their political donors and their Church (be it Catholic or otherwise) who, in the end, represents the millions who vote, will decide the inclusion of that cluase and other laguage that may not be acceptable to the "Church".

History, despite the present state of morality (or lack thereof) within the confines of the Country, has long been kind to the wishes of the Church and the influence it brings to bear on those that profess to be members of that Body.
again, it should be noted that abortion is not the only issue that is on the minds of the Church when it comes to this particular piece of legislation – there are other clauses, including penalties for those who do not carry insurance, that are considered “anti-family” by the Church.

In other Church/State News:
The Church has also come under attack on another front and the Bishops are fighting back: according to a story this morning in the Los Angeles Times

Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it would be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District of Columbia if the city refused to change a proposed same-sex marriage law.

The threat could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and healthcare.

Under the legislation, which the City Council is expected to pass next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey laws prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians.

NARAL (Pro-Abortion Group) Heralds Election of Pro-Abortion Legislators – Catholic Voters Guide

A quick guide for all Catholics, (or any given denomination that does not support Abortion): In light of Pope Benedict’s warning to Catholic legislatures this past week, following the short meeting with Rep. Nancy Pelosi (As head of the Vatican State, not head of the Catholic Church (a snub in itself) - the Pope noted it was every Catholics duty to uphold life at every stage. The Bishop of Scranton, (Pennsylvania), has taken up Benedicts tone, baring pro-abortion activist from any St. Patrick’s days masses or parades.

With this new tone on Abortion set by the Pope, the following may be a beneficial guide for lay people when considering candidates in 2010 (let alone the “stimulus package”). NARAL’s (pro-Abortion) website offers congratulations to all representatives that either won or held onto a seat in 2008 - those who have worked tirelessly for abortion rights, are noted with an asterisk as being endorsed by NARAL. The List From ProChoiceAmerica (NARAL)

President
Sen. Barack Obama *
Governors
Gov. Christine Gregoire, Washington
Gov. John Lynch, New Hampshire
Beverly Perdue, North Carolina
Gov. Brian Schweitzer, Montana
U.S. Senate
Sen. Max Baucus, Montana *
Mayor Mark Begich, Alaska *
Sen. Richard Durbin, Illinois *
Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa
Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts *
Sen. Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey *
Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan
State Speaker Jeff Merkley, Oregon *
Sen. Jack Reed, Rhode Island
Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire *
Rep. Tom Udall, New Mexico *
Rep. Mark Udall, Colorado *
U.S. House of Representatives
Rep. Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii - 01
Rep. Gary Ackerman, New York - 05
State Sen. John Adler, New Jersey - 03 *
Rep. Rob Andrews, New Jersey - 01
Rep. Michael Arcuri, New York - 24
Rep. Joe Baca, California - 43
Rep. Brian Baird, Washington - 03
Rep. Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin - 02
Rep. Melissa Bean, Illinois - 08
Rep. Xavier Becerra, California - 31
Rep. Shelley Berkley, Nevada - 01
Rep. Howard Berman, California - 28
Rep. Tim Bishop, New York - 01 *
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Oregon - 03
Rep. Rick Boucher, Virginia - 09 *
Rep. Bob Brady, Pennsylvania - 01
Rep. Bruce Braley, Iowa - 01 *
Rep. Corinne Brown, Florida - 03
Rep. Lois Capps, California - 23
Rep. Michael Capuano, Massachusetts - 08
Rep. Russ Carnahan, Missouri - 03 *
Rep. André Carson, Indiana - 07 *
Rep. Kathy Castor, Florida - 11
Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Michigan - 13 *
Rep. Yvette Clarke, New York - 11
Rep. William Lacy Clay, Missouri - 01
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri - 05
Rep. Steve Cohen, Tennessee - 09 *
Gerry Connolly, Virginia - 11 *
Rep. John Conyers, Michigan - 14
Rep. Joe Courtney, Connecticut - 02 *
Rep. Joseph Crowley, New York - 07
Rep. Elijah Cummings, Maryland - 07
Rep. Susan Davis, California - 53
Rep. Danny Davis, Illinois - 07
Rep. Peter DeFazio, Oregon - 04
Rep. Diana DeGette, Colorado - 01
Rep. William Delahunt, Massachusetts - 10
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Connecticut - 03 *
Rep. Norman Dicks, Washington - 06
Rep. Lloyd Doggett, Texas - 25 *
Rep. Donna Edwards, Maryland - 04 *
Rep. Keith Ellison, Minnesota - 05 *
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, Illinois - 05
Rep. Eliot Engel, New York - 17
Rep. Anna Eshoo, California - 14
Rep. Sam Farr, California - 17
Rep. Chaka Fattah, Pennsylvania - 02
Rep. Bob Filner, California - 51
Rep. Bill Foster, Illinois - 14 *
Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts - 04
Mayor Marcia Fudge, Ohio - 11
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona - 08 *
Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York - 20 *
Alan Grayson, Florida - 08 *
Rep. Al Green, Texas - 09
Rep. Raul Grijalva, Arizona - 07 *
Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Illinois - 04
Rep. John Hall, New York - 19
State Sen. Debbie Halvorson, Illinois - 11 *
Rep. Phil Hare, Illinois - 17 *
Rep. Jane Harman, California - 36
Rep. Alcee Hastings, Florida - 23
Martin Heinrich, New Mexico - 01 *
Rep. Brian Higgins, New York - 27
Rep. Maurice Hinchey, New York - 22
Rep. Mazie Hirono, Hawaii - 02 *
Rep. Paul Hodes, New Hampshire - 02 *
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia - AL
Rep. Rush Holt, New Jersey - 12
Rep. Mike Honda, California - 15
Rep. Steny Hoyer, Maryland - 05
Rep. Jay Inslee, Washington - 01
Rep. Steve Israel, New York - 02
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., Illinois - 02
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas - 18
Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas - 30
Rep. Hank Johnson, Georgia - 04
Rep. Ron Kind, Wisconsin - 03
Ann Kirkpatrick, Arizona - 01
Rep. Ron Klein, Florida - 22
Suzanne Kosmas, Florida - 24 *
Frank Kratovil, Maryland - 01
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Ohio - 10
Rep. Rick Larsen, Washington - 02
Rep. John Larson, Connecticut - 01
Rep. Barbara Lee, California - 09 *
Rep. Sandy Levin, Michigan - 12
Rep. John Lewis, Georgia - 05 *
Rep. David Loebsack, Iowa - 02 *
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, California - 16
Rep. Nita Lowey, New York - 18 *
Dan Maffei, New York - 25 *
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, New York - 14 *
Rep. Edward Markey, Massachusetts - 07
Betsy Markey, Colorado - 04 *
Eric Massa, New York - 29 *
Rep. Doris Matsui, California - 05
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, New York - 04
Rep. Betty McCollum, Minnesota - 04 *
Rep. Jim McDermott, Washington - 07
Rep. James McGovern, Massachusetts - 03 *
Mike McMahon, New York - 13
Rep. Jerry McNerney, California - 11 *
Rep. Kendrick Meek, Florida - 17
Rep. Gregory Meeks, New York - 06
Rep. George Miller, California - 07
Rep. Brad Miller, North Carolina - 13 *
Walt Minnick, Idaho - 01 *
Rep. Harry Mitchell, Arizona - 05 *
Rep. Gwen Moore, Wisconsin - 04
Rep. Jim Moran, Virginia - 08
Rep. Patrick Murphy, Pennsylvania - 08 *
Rep. Chris Murphy, Connecticut - 05 *
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, New York - 08 *
Rep. Grace Napolitano, California - 38
Rep. John Olver, Massachusetts - 01
Rep. Frank Pallone, New Jersey - 06
Rep. Ed Pastor, Arizona - 04
Rep. Donald Payne, New Jersey - 10
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, California - 08
Rep. Ed Perlmutter, Colorado - 07 *
Gary Peters, Michigan - 09 *
Jared Polis, Colorado - 02
Rep. David Price, North Carolina - 04
Rep. Charles Rangel, New York - 15
Laura Richardson, California - 37 *
Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, Texas - 23 *
Rep. Steve Rothman, New Jersey - 09
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, California - 34
Rep. Bobby Rush, Illinois - 01
Rep. Linda Sanchez, California - 39
Rep. Loretta Sanchez, California - 47
Rep. John Sarbanes, Maryland - 03
Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Illinois - 09
State Sen. Mark Schauer, Michigan - 07 *
Rep. Adam Schiff, California - 29
Rep. Allyson Schwartz, Pennsylvania - 13
Rep. David Scott, Georgia - 13
Rep. Bobby Scott, Virginia - 03
Rep. Jose Serrano, New York - 16
Rep. Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania - 07 *
Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire - 01
Rep. Brad Sherman, California - 27
Rep. Albio Sires, New Jersey - 13
Rep. Louise Slaughter, New York - 28
Rep. Adam Smith, Washington - 09
Rep. Hilda Solis, California - 32
Rep. Jackie Speier, California - 12
Rep. Pete Stark, California - 13
Rep. Betty Sutton, Ohio - 13
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, California - 10
Harry Teague, New Mexico - 02 *
Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi - 02
Rep. Mike Thompson, California - 01
Rep. John Tierney, Massachusetts - 06
Paul Tonko, New York - 21 *
Rep. Edolphus Towns, New York - 10
Rep. Niki Tsongas, Massachusetts - 05
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland - 08
Rep. Nydia Velazquez, New York - 12
Rep. Tim Walz, Minnesota - 01 *
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida - 20
Rep. Maxine Waters, California - 35
Rep. Diane Watson, California - 33
Rep. Melvin Watt, North Carolina - 12
Rep. Henry Waxman, California - 30
Rep. Anthony Weiner, New York - 09
Rep. Peter Welch, Vermont - AL *
Rep. Robert Wexler, Florida - 19
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, California - 06
Rep. David Wu, Oregon – 01

Length of Term in Office House of Representatives, 2 years, Senate – 6 years, President – 4 years. Next election: 2010.

Pope Benedict Reads Riot Act to Pelosi – Will the Pope Rock the Catholic Vote in 2010?

Photograph: Catholic News Agency

Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Speaker of the House, and third in line to the Presidency (lest we forget), met with Pope Benedict on Wednesday. The Pope met with Ms. Pelosi as the Head of State of the Vatican, specifically not the “Head of the Church”, which, in itself was significant. Pelosi, along with other pro-abortion Democrat candidates, consistently use their Catholicism during campaigns, either by professing to be “ardent Catholics”, or making “newsworthy” appearance at churches; while vigorously campaigning for a women’s “right to choose”, and receiving endorsements from pro-abortion organizations such as N.A.R.A.L. CNA (The Catholic News Agency) has been reporting this meeting and printed the following from the Vatican:

Immediately after the meeting, the Holy See’s press office released a statement saying, "following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage."
"His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

Further, Pope Benedict allowed no camera’s or press during the brief meeting, taking away any opportunity for Ms. Pelosi to use the press to further political ambitions. (It is estimated that Catholics make up one of the largest voting blocs in the United States and are a key “swing vote” in U.S. elections. , Additionally, 70% of Hispanics identify themselves as Catholic )

Benedict's Vatican, has been, by far, the most vocal in opposition to politicians and abortion worldwide. In October of 2008, the Prefect of the Vatican's Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature, labeled the Democrat Party – “the Party of Death” in response to the pro-abortion policies of the majority of the party’s figureheads. The Pope’s statement issued after the private meeting with Pelosi, constitutes a strong rebuke of all Catholic Politician’s who profess their faith and then, to pacify their backers and some constituents, rely on the excuse of “choice”. Benedict is clearly not buying any of this.

Reuters reported that Ms. Pelosi issued a very brief statement after her meeting at the Vatican, however, did not mention abortion, rather praised the Catholic Church on its stance on peace and global warming.

A Catholic “pro-choice” group (oxymoron) “Catholics for Choice”, headed by Jon O’Brien, in an interview with “The Hill” hoped that the meeting with Pelosi would focus on “bigger” issues than abortion: “That would be a real conversation about choice, instead of this micro-obsession with abortion,” O’Brien said. “They made a very intelligent, diplomatic move.”
The Groups Website Article entitled “Catholic Voters and Policy Makers Lead the Way” written this past November by Mr. O'Brien praises the election of Barack Obama and the role Catholics played in electing such a pro-choice President, the following excerpt is chilling to this Catholic:

As pro choice Catholics, we celebrate the election of a pro choice President who has been a strong supporter of abortion rights, comprehensive sexuality education and access to reproductive health care. The next administration will have to work hard to repair the damage done to reproductive right during the last eight years: the Global Gag Rule, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, subordinating science to personal belief, and a pervasive program against family-planning efforts. Undoubtedly, concerns about America’s economic security and military engagements overseas will garner a great deal of attention. However, we urge the next administration and Congress to also work for advances in reproductive health care in the US and abroad.

In other words, Mr. O’Brien and like-minded politician’s who are staunch advocates of abortion – against the teaching of a Church they profess to follow faithfully - merely use the Church to promote their agenda.

What Mr. O’Brien and politician’s like Ms. Pelosi, Biden, John Kerry, etc. had banked on in the past was the disconnect between Catholics, specifically, moderate politically minded Catholics and more traditional Conservative Catholics, as well silence from the U.S. Church and the Pope. However, Benedict is far removed in temperament from John Paul, and the growing evangelical base within the Catholic Church, the inclusion of a very conservative Hispanic Catholic population coupled with an increasingly vocal group of U.S. Bishops, may actually put an end to the game of mixing politics and church by pro-abortion politicians seeking re-election.

The following AP Video puts the meeting and the Pope’s view of Politician’s and their role as “Catholics” into perspective: (Note: there are 1,057 articles in a Google Search: “Pelosi and the Pope”)


Speaking as an Evangelical Catholic, and a values voter – to cast a vote for a politician who pro-actively campaigns on the abortion ticket – regardless of religious affiliation would run counter to conscious for this Hispanic, first generation American. To use a phrase form one of the commenter on CAN’s article regarding the Pope’s stand: “Benedict Rocks!” It remains to be seen, with the 2010 elections on the horizon, how this will play out in states that have a significant block of Catholic voters.

The Catholic Church – Opposition to Pro-Abortion Candidates and Elected Officials Intensifies

A Catholic Priest (AP) in South Carolina is refusing communion to those who voted for Barrack Obama because “the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil." This should come as no surprise to those in the press, or the general public for that matter. The Church has intensified its remarks on abortion in this past general election cycle. The opposition to pro-abortion candidates by the Church Bishops is clear - it is simply unacceptable. From refusing communion to John Kerry in 2004, to recent admonitions against Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden from American Bishops, the Church is firming up its stance on the abortion issue and those who support the practice.

The Catholic opposition to abortion is known by parishioners - as are the consequences – although Bishops have become more vocal in the past few elections regarding politician’s who support abortion - that message does not necessarily trickle down to the parishes within a diocese. It was this general election, where Obama was so closely tied to abortion rights (NARAL endorsed Obama over Clinton early in the primary process) and had a solid record of support for the process, including partial-birth abortion (See Saddleback Forum) that prompted the Catholic Church to act more aggressively on this issue. The South Carolina priest is acting in good faith. One may disagree with the process, or the penalty, however,as a Catholic one has to understand that there is a choice to be made between ones faith and ones actions in the world – and should the choice be a political party over faith, then there are consequences. The Church doctrine is what it is – penalties have always been part and parcel of this process. The problem is that most of the parishioners have no idea that they acted out of faith because of the “politically correct” language that is used vis a vis abortion – “pro-choice” sounds benign, and is taken as such – understanding that there is a “choice”, but not clear about what that choice might be. It is understood by those who are involved in abortion issue, either pro or con – but not necessarily by those sitting in the pews. When asked why one would support a candidate that is pro-choice, the answer is simply that the candidate is either of the same political affiliation, or would end a war – however, if the question is worded, would you support a candidate that supports abortion – the answer changes to a flat no. In most cases, the connect is not made between pro-choice and pro-abortion.

Should the Church continue to take a firm stand on this issue, they should take care to use plain language when speaking to parishioners regarding any candidate, regardless of party. To those who would cry separation of church and state, keep in mind that politicians from both sides of the aisle, use the Church as a means to reach constituents during the campaign cycle. John Kerry (D-MA), made sure camera crews were at the ready when he visited local churches in this last election – those sitting at home watching the evening news, see this as the church condoning a particular candidate – it is calculated on the part of the candidate and one can be sure that this example is the norm. There are issues voters, and there are values voters – and then there are the uninformed voters - Many of those who are also value voters chose a candidate in this general election, based not on their religious doctrine, but on a lack of information coming from the Church. Therefore, the Church should take care to educate their parishioners, not two weeks before a general election, but immediately and consistently, should they insist that doctrine be followed to the letter.

For additional information on the Catholic Church and its anti-abortion stand – visit: Priests for Life.

Obama – on Partial-Birth Abortion – A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing

Barack Obama has recently decided that a woman should not qualify for a late-term (partial-birth) abortion if the only qualifier for the procedure is “mental distress”. There is absolutely no medical reason for a partial-birth abortion, with the exception of “mental distress”. (Physicians for Life) In cases of “Mental Stress” reasons include the development of certain defects in the unborn child, (perhaps it’s not the correct gender), or the emotional distress (becoming a parent may be too much for the woman to stand). Barak Obama, in courting those who are less liberal Christians, has made this concession as he must believe those that are clutching to their guns and bibles were also born yesterday.

In a recent interview with Relevant Magazine, a publication that is focused on God, Life and Progressive Culture, he speaks about his Faith Based Initiative (shades of George Bush!), and why he feels the Congress would pass his version (no need to state the obvious), and goes on to talk about his personal disdain for abortion. Strangely contradicting his reaction last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions - Obama disagreed with the ruling because it was a departure from precedents that safeguard a pregnant women’s health.

He has also defended his opposition to restrictions placed on partial-birth abortions in his political past (one term as a state senator and half a term as a US Senator). He voted against the “Born Alive”Illinois Senate Bill.

Let’s call a “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”, a “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”! Barack Obama accepted NARAL’s all important endorsement, (otherwise known as a key issue when it comes to Democrats seeking election or re-election – they are always “pro-choice” – which, by the by, should be called “pro-abortion”) knowing full well what the qualifiers were for partial-birth abortion, abortion in general and the no-holds barred approach of this particular organization. To learn more about the political arm of NARAL and how they see the differences between John McCain and Obama, visit
Pro-AbortionAmerica.org/Elections Apparently, John McCain is a candidate that is “pro-life” or, “Against Abortion”.

The distinctions between these two candidates were made clear to the 90 Christian church leaders recently in Denver by Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas and 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate. These same leaders met last week to unite behind John McCain’s
(WZMM13) candidacy.

Apparently, Barak Obama’s recent conversions vis-a-vis partial-birth abortion and Faith Based Initiatives have brought to light his support for those things that are anathema to the very people he is desperately trying to pursued. Barack Obama - “less evil”? (Jeff Greenfield, Slate Blog – “How Obama Can Lessen the Opposition”) Perhaps so, or perhaps “less careful” when it comes to fooling all of the people, some of the time.