American Papist Issues Challenge to Left-Leaning Catholics: "No More Claiming US Bishops Are 'Partisan' on Abortion"

Tom Peters has issued a challenge to certain left-leaning Catholics "in the interest of dialogue":

I challenge them to explicitly and totally repudiate the pernicious claim that US Bishops, when they speak about abortion, are engaging in "partisan politics." This same claim is similarly made about American Catholics when they, essentially, mimic the talking points of the US Bishops.

The claim that US Bishops, and those who agree with them, are "partisan" when it comes to abortion is deeply hypocritcal, because such a claim is, itself, a partisan charge made exclusively by liberals.

Tom then goes on to quote L'Osservatore Romano (which the Catholic left has recently taken to treating with magesterial authority) against them:

"Obviously the Holy See and L’Osservatore Romano have been, are and will be fully at the side of the U.S. bishops in their commitment in favor of the inviolability of human life in whatever stage of its existence.

Other interpretations have no foundation, especially those that have wanted to use the newspaper’s articles to make it appear that the teachings of the U.S. episcopate on the inherent evil of abortion were an exercise in partisan politics, supposedly in contrast with a different strategy of the Holy See."

(emphasis added)

So, will the Catholic left now be willing to abandon the claim that the Bishops are acting out of partisan interests or in a partisan manner now that L'OR has put that little calumny to rest?

(Hat tip: Opinionated Catholic)

Should Catholics Work for Legal Restrictions on Abortion?

Amy Welborn offers a provocative resolution for discussion:

The discussion of the post below is veering, quite naturally, to the subject of Roe and the place of legal restrictions on abortion in the pro-life movement.

So, we might as well go ahead and go there. I have company drifting in over the next few hours, so I really am not in the proper frame of mind to compose a post, so I’ll be lazy and just throw this out there:

Resolved:

The anti-abortion movement should abandon any attempts to overturn Roe v. Wade or even work for legal restrictions on abortion. That battle has been lost. Further, it is not required, from the standpoint of Catholic teaching, to work towards criminalization of or restrictions on abortion.

Discuss.

My own thoughts on the subject can be read here and here. Be sure to check in over at Amy's every so often to follow the discussion.

Has There Ever Been Such a Strong Condemnation of the "Pro-Choice" Position from a Catholic Prelate?

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

August 26, 2008

(emphasis added)

McCain Hints at Pro-Choice Catholic Tom Ridge as Potential Running Mate

From The Washington Times:

Sen. John McCain said Wednesday that he would not rule out naming a pro-choice vice-presidential nominee, saying the abortion issue amounts to "a disagreement" and that he thinks conservatives would accept former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, who is pro-choice, as a potential running mate.

"I think that the pro-life position is one of the important aspects or fundamentals of the Republican Party," Mr. McCain told the Weekly Standard in an interview published on the magazine's Web site Wednesday afternoon. "And I also feel that - and I'm not trying to equivocate here - that Americans want us to work together. You know, Tom Ridge is one of the great leaders and he happens to be pro-choice. And I don't think that that would necessarily rule Tom Ridge out."

But social-conservative leaders say a pro-choice nominee would cripple Mr. McCain politically with the Republican Party base.

[More]

Delegates to Knights of Columbus Convention Adopt Resolutions Challenging Catholic Office-Holders

I received the following email from the Knights of Columbus earlier today:

Knights of Columbus convention delegates adopt resolutions challenging Catholic office-holders on abortion, affirming marriage as union of one man and one woman

(Quebec City, Quebec) - Delegates to the annual international convention of the Knights of Columbus today adopted a resolution opposing "any governmental action or policy that promotes abortion, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, euthanasia, assisted suicide and other offenses against life."

The delegates also challenged "our fellow Catholics who are elected officials to be true to the faith they claim to profess by acting bravely and publicly in defense of life, affirming with Pope Benedict XVI that 'there can be no room for purely private religion.'"

The resolution stated that the organization reaffirms its "commitment to building a culture of life by promoting policies that favor the family," and reaffirmed the organization's "long standing policy of not inviting to any Knights of Columbus event persons, especially public officials or candidates for public office, who do not support the legal protection of unborn children."

The resolution on life issues follows by several days the opening convention address by Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson, in which he called on Catholic voters to "stop accommodating pro-abortion politicians," and encouraged them to "say 'no' to every candidate of every political party who supports abortion."

Delegates also adopted a resolution calling for "legal and constitutional protection . . . for the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

The resolution declares that "marriage is a natural institution based on ancient human values that have evolved over time into a unique and deeply rooted social, legal and religious institution," and that it "reflects the natural biological complementarity between man and woman which predates the state and which is woven into the social and religious fabric of every major culture and society."

Marriage between man and woman "provides the most favorable environment in which to protect the rights and the best interests of children," the resolution stated.

Convention delegates adopted resolutions dealing with other public policy issues as well, including building a culture of life, religious liberty, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, decency on the Internet and in the media, Catholic education, and the Pledge of Allegiance. The texts of all the resolutions can be found at:

http://www.kofc.org/un/eb/en/convention_2008/resolutions/index.html

For complete coverage of convention events, go to the "Convention Central" web page at:

http://www.kofc.org/un/eb/en/convention_2008/index.html

The Pro-Abortion Crowd Hates McCain

That's a great medal of honor for McCain in the eyes of many Catholic voters that he can (and does) wear with pride. Here is the tirade against McCain by a well-known liberal, pro-abortion blogger at this link. Little does she realize that she is helping to solidify the conservative base and Reagan Democrats for McCain when she accurately describes him as extremely pro-life. In her eyes, that's a "reactionary record." Other media sources have mentioned plans by the Obama campaign to explicitly target McCain's pro-life record in the general election campaign. Yes, Obama "the nice guy" has no problem enthusiastically leading the way in the killing of the unborn. I guess the "audacity of hope" does not include hope for the unborn and partially born.

Catholics, Republicans and Abortion: How We Got Where We Are Today

Criss-Cross: Democrats, Republicans, and Abortion Human Life Review Summer 2006.

A fascinating article from a while back (which I uncovered revisiting old issues of First Things) asks a question that is relevant even today, while providing a conception-shattering history of how, in the words of Fr. Neuhaus, we got where we are today.

Here's a taste:

The Bernardin of 1976 developed a very powerful case for abolishing abortion. Appearing before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee in March of that year, he went out of his way to refute the argument (later advanced by Mario Cuomo) that opposition to abortion is a purely "religious" position which Catholics must not try to impose on non-Catholics. Abortion, Bernardin said, "is not wrong simply because the Catholic Church or any church says it is wrong. Abortion is wrong in and of itself. The obligation to safeguard human life arises not from religious or sectarian doctrine, but from universal moral imperatives concerning human dignity, the right to life, and the responsibility of government to protect basic human rights."

With the election fast approaching, Bernardin kept up the fire. Some weeks before Carter met with the Bishops' executive committee, he issued a statement anticipating Carter's argument that the Democrats' other positions were in accord with Church doctrine, aimed as they were at countering the threats to life from hunger, disease, drug and alcohol abuse, and other ills. Bernardin agreed that human life is threatened in a number of ways in our society. Abortion, however, stands out because it is "a direct assault on the lives of those who are least able to defend themselves.... [I]f we become insensitive to the violation of the basic right to life, our sensitivity to the entire spectrum of human rights will ultimately be eroded." After the meeting Bernardin repeated those views, reminding his listeners that the bishops had expressed strong disagreement-"indeed outrage"-with the Democrats' abortion plank. "We ... repeat today, with all the moral force we can muster, the need for a constitutional amendment to protect the life of the unborn."

Curiousity perked? -- Read the whole thing.

Pro-Life Group Launches HumanaeVitaePriests.Org

Catholic News Service reports on the launching of a new website, humanaevitaepriests.org, to help priests, deacons and seminarians teach and evangelize using Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae:

The site producers plan to supply offering reflections, commentaries, homily aids and solid practical resources for priests to preach about and defend Catholic teachings concerning marital love and contraception. The site is located at http://www.humanaevitaepriests.org/

According to John Mallon, director of HumanaeVitaePriests.org, the site will examine the “disastrous aspects of widespread contraception,” including its “medical, sociological, hormonal, psychological, cultural, pastoral, spiritual, even environmental aspects.” It will feature the commentary of special guest experts.

The site includes a special supplement from the magazine Inside the Vatican’s 1998 issue commemorating the 30th anniversary of the encyclical. The free supplement, titled “A Prophecy for Our Time,” includes interviews with Human Life International founder Father Paul Marx, Priests for Life president Father Frank Pavone, Dr. Janet Smith, and Dr. Alice von Hildebrand. It also contains a pastoral letter from Archbishop Charles Chaput and an article from then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before his election to the papacy.

“Our prayer is that this project will be a positive effort to spread the light and truth of God’s plan for love, marriage and sexuality,” said Mallon.

Paul Kengor on "Why the Rudy Rejection Matters"

Paul Kengor on Why the Rudy Rejection Matters (National Catholic Register):

The reality is that the rejection of Rudy by Republicans should not be brushed off lightly and quickly; it merits pause for careful reflection, and perhaps even celebration.

Let there be no doubt that Rudy was refused because of outrage at how he proudly and unequivocally supports a “woman’s right to choose.” This was a Republican religious rejection of Rudy. He was rejected not only by evangelicals but by the pro-life Catholics who share his party and his faith.

Yet, it was also much more, especially for Republicans and for Catholics. Consider the big picture:

Over the last two or three decades, the Democratic Party has increasingly championed policies that extinguish what Pope John Paul II and his Church have called the first of all freedoms and the most basic of all human rights: the right to life.

Since Roe v. Wade, and particularly since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1981, the Republican Party (by and large) has not sacrificed its soul at the altar of political expediency on the abortion issue. Republicans like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have battled dogmatic abortion advocates in the Democratic Party like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and now Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for whom abortion remains a kind of political sacrament, even though some of them are Catholic. . . .

All of this now brings us to a historic crossroads: Thanks to pro-life diligence by certain Republicans, and particularly two decades of generally decent court appointments by Reagan and Bush (along with some obvious failures), Roe v. Wade has the chance of being reversed under the next president.

And that’s where denying Rudy Giuliani the 2008 Republican nomination and the presidency becomes so profoundly important: If Roe v. Wade is reversed, Catholics, and Catholics who are Republican, will be spared the shame of a Catholic Republican president unable to understand or make the moral case against abortion. They will be spared the spectacle of a Catholic Republican president voicing his “personal disagreement” with the decision.

However, if Obama's momentum persists as it has been, we may very well find ourselves with a president wholeheartedly committed to the preservation of the "right to choice" under Roe v. Wade. There's the rub.

Bill Clinton Blows a Gasket with Pro-Life Protestors

The Billary Machine was campaigning in Steubenville, OH this past Tuesday -- the Steubenville Students for Life organized a public protest, provoking the former president to lose his temper. Thomas Peters (American Papist) provides full coverage and updates.

Countering the "GOP / Bush 'duped' Pro-Lifers" Smear

In recent weeks we've heard the argument -- advanced by more than one member of Vox Nova -- that the pro-life movement has been exploited by the Republican Party. "Dupes" of the GOP who pay little more than lip service to the cause if and when they find it politically expedient to do so. See, for instance, "Willingly Duped, Again and Again (Vox Nova January 24, 2008); likewise, over the past several days various members of Vox Nova have issued the following denunciations:

• "The GOP cannot afford to actually work to end abortion. If they did, it would be a great victory, but they would have nothing else that serious Christians could point to as a reason to support the party. Republicans need to keep abortion legal, but make it look like they are trying to end it, so that this game can keep on going and going." (Michael Iafrate 01/28/08)
  
  
• "I think token gestures such as voting for "this guy" because "he is against abortion" and politics continue as usual, abortion continues as usual, and the walks for life with only a reflection on abortion being bad without any progress continue as usual, ends up being the one who is causing the greatest harm to the cause. Pro-lifers have become just a token group with only lip service given to them and that lip service amuses them enough that they think everyone has done their duty. Instead, it just means they have given over to flattery." (Henry Karlson 01/27/08)
  
  
• "At bottom, politicians are adept at manipulating the public’s opinion about themselves. Rarely do they go much beyond that. Jesse Helms was on the right side of the unborn issue, but look what he did on the questions of social justice. And what did he accomplish on the unborn issue. Nothing. The odds are simply too great that none of these politicians will accomplish anything, and when they do, it is too often the case that the means they employ will create more problems than they solve. . . . As for the rights of the unborn, I know of no existing policy that is going to make a difference. It simply won’t happen precisely because at bottom this challenge is a spiritual matter requiring a spiritual solution. Once again, the means must be proportionate to the end." (Gerald Campbell 01/28/08)
  
  
• "None of the cadidates are either willing or capable of stopping the slaughter of our unborn. America’s entire system of governance is satanically rigged to produce injustice, for it is founded upon idolatry and violence. . . . ponder the fruits: thousands of nukes ready to annihilate the world, millions of abortions, and a “justice” system that can’t stop torture or the crowding of our prisons with blacks and latinos. The monsters of the Apocalypse are alive and well in this world, and they live in the political structure of the United States." (Nate Wildermuth 01/29/08)

DISCLAIMER:^* The political affiliation of the aformentioned authors is unknown. Most of them have elsewhere offered criticism of the Democratic Party's formal support of abortion and anti-life policies, and some -- but not ALL -- of Vox Nova contributors are deeply critical of the Republican Party.

However, insofar as the better part of "pro-life" legislation is introduced and promoted by Republicans, this reader's impression is that the GOP remains the target of this unfair characterization when it is offered.

Consequently, this line of "argument" is often advanced (here and elsewhere) to criticize Republicans and "Catholic conservatives"; or to deride both parties in general (in a "pox on both your houses" manner of speaking); and, in the case of one author in particular (Gerald Campbell, with whom we have previously taken issue), it has been employed as a case for voting for Barack Obama, on grounds that since attempts to resolve the scourge of abortion by legislation and the formation of public policy have proved inconsequential, a reasonable alternative would be to embrace a candidate like Obama who, through his gift at rhetoric, might

". . . summon heroic forces from the spiritual depths of ordinary citizens and to unleash therefrom a symphonic chorus of unique creative acts whose common purpose is to tame the soul and alleviate the great challenges facing mankind."

With respect to this proposal, I dispute whether any Catholic could vote in good conscience for a candidate who is wholly committed to passing The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA).

I also reject the characterization of the pro-life movement as little more than "dupes" and the Republicans as nothing more than con artists. To assert this, I think, is a great disservice and slander against many of those in the GOP who with sincere convictions have paid their dues "slogging through the legislative trenches", so to speak, on behalf of their constituents, chief of all the unborn. We have profiled many of these individuals within this blog and it troubles me to see them ridiculed in such a manner.

In this post I'd like to challenge this allegation by examining some past pro-life legislation and legislative achievements (initiated by Republicans) to get a sense of what is at stake when we vote -- and why it is important to vote for politicans who are concerned about advancing a culture of life.

Significant Pro-Life Achievements Sponsored by the GOP

When we started this blog in 2004 I blogged a post on the legislation that might be passed under the Bush administration. I found it very educational and a helpful reminder of ways in which legislators we elect can mitigate the effects of Roe v. Wade by the passing of pro-life legislation (much of which is aimed at laying the groundwork for legal recognition of the personhood of the unborn).

• Unborn Victims of Violence Act (also known as "Laci and Conner's Law"), signed into law by President George W. Bush on April 1, 2004, was enacted after a five-year effort led by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC). This bill was sponsored in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Melissa Hart (R-Pa.). A Senate companion bill (S. 1019) was sponsored by Senator Mike DeWine (R-Ohio). The House of Representatives approved the bill on February 26, 2004 (254-163) and the Senate approved it on March 25, 2004 (61-38).

  The act recognizes that when a criminal attacks a pregnant woman, and injures or kills both her and her unborn child, he has claimed two human victims. The bill would establish that if a "child in utero" is injured or killed during the commission of certain federal crimes of violence, then the assailant may be charged with a second offense on behalf of the second victim, the unborn child.
  

  While the law makes an exception to any abortion to which a woman has consented, to any act of the mother herself (legal or illegal), or to any form of medical treatment, it was nonetheless supported by the National Right to Life as granting legal personhood to the unborn -- and by the same token was vehemently opposed by Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice organizations. See Legislative history on federal and state versions of the bill.
  

• The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act extended legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion. Identified as Public Law 107-207, it was signed into law August 5, 2002 by President Bush,[1] and was based on HR 2175 (passed March 12). The Senate counterpart, initiated by Sen. Rick Santorum, passed July 18. When he signed the law, President Bush said, "This important legislation ensures that every infant born alive -- including an infant who survives an abortion procedure -- is considered a person under federal law." He added, "Today, through sonograms and other technology, we can see clearly that unborn children are members of the human family, as well." (Legislative History.
  

  As reported earlier, a version of this law (the Induced Infant Liability Act,) was vehemently opposed in Illinois by Senator Barack Obama.
  

• The Partial Birth Abortion Ban was perhaps the most famous piece of pro-life legislation signed into law by President Bush in 2003. The bill represents the first direct national restriction on any method of abortion since the Supreme Court legalized abortion on demand in 1973. The bill bans "partial-birth abortion," and it legally defines a partial-birth abortion as any abortion in which the baby is delivered "past the [baby's] navel . . . outside the body of the mother," OR "in the case of head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother," BEFORE being killed. See the complete official text of the bill; key documents on medical issues relating to partial birth abortion and
  

  The bill has been met with vigorous opposition by Democrats and subject to numerous attempts to repeal. In the case of Gonzales v. Carhart in 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a legal challenge by a lower court blocking enforcement of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act -- the 5 justices voting to uphold the ban? Newly appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito, along with Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Anthony Kennedy.
  

• In November 2004, Congress passed the Hyde/Weldon Conscience Protection Amendment, prohibits discrimination on the level of federal, state or local government against health care providers who decline to provider, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.
  

• In June 6, 2007, the U.S. House turned back a "stealth attempt" by Democratic leadership to pass a "clone-and-kill" bill that would have promoted large-scale cloning of human embroyos for research. Deceptively titled "The Human Cloning Prohibition Act," it would have banned "reproductive cloning" but would not have prohibited the cloning, harvesting and ultimate destruction of embroyos for scientific research.
  

  As the USCCB explained: "Such a ban [on "reproductive cloning"] does not actually ban cloning. It waits until the cloning procedure is finished, then forbids live birth of the resulting clones. It would be highly ineffective even at achieving its own goal." [Click here for the full NRLC page on legislation pertaining to human cloning].
  

• In June 20, 2007, President Bush veto of legislation (S. 5) that would mandate federal funding of the type of stem cell research that requires the killing of human embryos, in addition to issuing an executive order to promote more federal funding for promising types of stem cell research that do not require harming human embryos. On May 3, 2007, President Bush sent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv.) and House Speaker Pelosi letters in which he said, "I will veto any legislation that weakens current Federal policies and laws on abortion, or that encourages the destruction of human life at any stage."
  

• In September 20, 2007, Senator Brownback introduced the Ultrasound Informed Consent Act, which would require that a doctor (1) perform an ultrasound, (2) share the results with the woman and allow her to (3) view the images before performing an abortion. The bill seeks to ensure that abortion providers allow women to understand fully the nature of the young life within them. No woman could be prosecuted, as the requirements are placed solely on the abortion provider.
  

Failed legislation:

• The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act (S 356 & HR 3442) | Full text, introduced by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), would require abortionists to provide women seeking abortion after 20 weeks past fertilization (the beginning of the sixth month) a brochure explaining that there is "substantial evidence" that the abortion will cause pain to the unborn child, and advise them of their right to request the administration of pain-reducing drugs to the unborn child. The bill failed by a vote of 250-162, short of the two-thirds majority required under rules that limit debate.
  

  On its face, this might not seem like a very significant act -- it is what you might call incremental. Like the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, it's value is in placing before the consciousness of the mother (and perhaps the abortionist) the humanity of the unborn. To quote Senator Sam Brownback:

  Women should not be kept in the dark; women have the right to know what their unborn child experiences during an abortion. After being presented with the medical and scientific information on the development of the unborn child 20 weeks after fertilization, the woman is more aware of the pain experienced by the child during an abortion procedure, and able--at the very least--to make an informed decision.

  Suffice to say it was for this very reason that it was opposed by "pro-choice" organizations.
  

• The Child Custody Protection Act (S. 403), sponsored by Sen. John Ensign (R-Nv.) and Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fl.), would have make it a crime for anyone to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion (to circumvent parental notification/consent laws in their home states). It was originally passed by the Senate on July 25 by a vote of 65-34, but future progress was blocked:

  Hours before Congress adjourned for pre-election campaigning, 57 senators voted to remove the final procedural obstacle to S. 403, which would have cleared the bill for transmission to President Bush for his signature. But 57 was three votes short of the 60 required under Senate rules to break through a procedural roadblock erected by the Senate Democratic leadership.

  
  

President Bush's Pro-Life Record

In addressing the question of whether or not President Bush has been sympathetic to the pro-life movement (and not merely using it for political expediency), I think it best to let his enemies testify. Which is to say, in judging his pro-life accomplishments, who better to turn to then Planned Parenthood? -- See "George W. Bush's War on Women: A Pernicious Web: A Planned Parenthood Report on the Administration and Congress" providing "A Chronology of Attacks on Reproductive Rights" under the Bush administration and a GOP-led Congress. The actual report is 87 pages long, but let's focus on just one aspect of accomplishments of President Bush's term: Redefining the Legal Status of the Fetus (keep in mind the perspective is that of a "pro-choice" organization):

• House passes "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" (April 26, 2001).
  
• HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson announces new rules making fetuses, but not pregnant women, eligible for prenatal care in the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) (March 5, 2002).
  
• Announcement made by administration that approximately $900,000 available for financial assistance and applications for embryo "adoption" (July 25, 2002).
  
• HHS Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protection Charter gives embryos new status as "human subjects" (October 2002).
  
• House passes so-called "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" giving zygote, embryo, or fetus the same legal rights as a person and further undermining a woman's right to an abortion (February 26, 2004).
  
• Federal District Judge Phyllis Hamilton Protects Patients' Privacy by Denying DOJ's Request for Planned Parenthood Medical Records in Course of Federal Abortion Ban Trial (March 5, 2004).
  
• "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" passes Senate, grants fertilized egg legal status distinct from woman, posing threat to the foundations of Roe v. Wade (March 25, 2004).
  
• President signs so-called "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" into law, may help lay groundwork for future effort to reverse Roe v. Wade (April 1, 2004).

Why Does Pro-Life Policy Matter?

In January the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the special research arm of Planned Parenthood, showing the annual number of abortions reaching their lowest level in nearly 30 years (Abortion Numbers Continue to Decline NRLC January 17, 2008):

The Guttmacher Institute report finds just over 1.2 million abortions in the United States in 2005, down nearly 25% from their high of 1.6 million in 1990, and the lowest reported total since 1.179 million in 1976. Additionally, the report shows the abortion rate (the number of abortions per every thousand women age 15-44) down to 19.4 per thousand – the lowest since 1974. The Guttmacher report speculates that the lower abortion rates may be due to "more women carrying unintended pregnancies to term," implicitly acknowledging that attitudes toward abortion and pregnancy may have substantially changed.

Some of this decline may probably be attributed to dubious causes -- the widespread use of contraceptives, more specically the provision of RU-486 and the "Morning After Pill".

At the same time, we can likely attribute some of this decline to the genuine efforts of those in public service to passing legislation at the federal and state levels protecting the unborn and equipping mothers with information:

Twenty-three states have women's right to know laws that provide women seeking abortion with information about abortion and its risks, biological information about the development of their unborn child and available alternatives to abortion, including, significantly, the types of both governmental and private assistance available if they choose to bear their child. Eleven states also make provisions for women to view ultrasound footage of their unborn child.

Twenty-eight states have laws providing for parental involvement in a minor daughter's abortion decision. Other data show that teen abortion rates have fallen further and faster than abortion rates as a whole.

Also significant has been the enactment of partial-birth abortion bans at the federal and state level. Public debate surrounding these laws has further increased the public's awareness about abortion and the development of unborn children in utero.

This is something to be thankful for, though there is much work yet to be done. And I concur with the critics of Vox Nova: legislation alone will not change hearts and minds. What is truly needed is spiritual transformation on the part of the American populace and a re-orientation towards life. But the passing of such legislation and the efforts of the Bush administration and Republicans have at the very least served the cause of justice, in protecting the right to life of the "least among us." In the words of Br. Matthew Augustine, OP in a comment at Vox Nova: "The law isn’t merely there to coerce behavior but also to protect the common good and reflect the truth of the human person and the moral order. It is worth our blood, sweat and tears to work to ensure that the dignity of unborn life is reflected in law."

WHAT YOU CAN DO

I don't expect to win any hearts or minds of those who have ridiculed the pro-life movement as chumps for falling into the hands of conniving Republicans. But I have the hope that readers will
keep in mind what is at stake when they vote, and why those representatives whom we elect matter. As far as supporting legislative pro-life efforts, here is what you can do:

• The USCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities lists the following concerns for Catholics: Abortion, Assisted Suicide, Capital Punishment, Cloning, Contraception, Embryo Research, Euthanasia, Fetal Research, In Vitro Fertilization, Morning After Pill, Mexico City Policy, Partial-Birth Abortion, Post Abortion, Roe v. Wade, RU-486, Stem Cell Research and Unborn Victims of Violence. Many if not most of these concerns are shared by non-Catholic Christians nationwide. (You can also ask yourself, where does your prospective candidate stand on these issues?)
  

• The Right to Life Legislative Action Center provides action alerts on current pro-life legislation on abortion, human embroyos/human cloning, euthanasia/assisted suicide, adoption and abortion alternatives and Key Votes in Congress. Likewise important, it keeps you up to date on legislation which should be opposed.
  

---

* The "Disclaimer" was offered and modified subsequent to the posting on account that some parties cited might be perceived as being beholden to the Democrats or formally supporting a Democratic candidate. As stated only one author has publicly expressed his personal support for Obama.

My hope is that the discussion will proceed from questioning this or that individual's partisan affiliation to challenging the specific claim -- as stated in the title of this post -- that the GOP / Bush have "duped", and done nothing for, the pro-life movement.

Thomas Peters covers March for Life @ Washington DC

Thomas Peters (American Papist) is providing extensive eyewitness coverage (written and video) of the March for Life in Washington.

Robert P. George's "Unrequited Letter to Ann Rice"

On her website, famous author Ann Rice has defended her personal endorsement of Hillary Clinton (to the tune of Ave Maria, no less):

. . . To summarize, I believe in voting, I believe in voting for one of the two major parties, and I believe my vote must reflect my Christian beliefs.

Bearing all this in mind, I want to say quietly that as of this date, I am a Democrat, and that I support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States.

Though I deeply respect those who disagree with me, I believe, for a variety of reasons, that the Democratic Party best reflects the values I hold based on the Gospels.

Princeton Professor Robert P. George challenges her in "An Unrequited Letter to Ann Rice" (First Things' blog; December 17, 2007):

. . . I once had the honor of representing Mother Teresa of Calcutta as counsel of record on an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court of the United States asking for the reversal of Roe v. Wade. (I would be happy to send you a copy, if you like.) Mother made the point that we cannot fight credibly against other social and moral evils, including poverty and violence, while we tolerate mass killing by abortion. In this, it seems to me, she stated with characteristic simplicity a profound truth.

You have endorsed a candidate and a political party that believes that abortion, far from being an injustice, is a fundamental right. They are pledged to oppose any meaningful legal protections of the life of the child in the womb. They have even sought to protect the grisliest of methods of abortion–the “dilation and intact extraction” procedure. In this, they are promoting the greatest injustice and abuse of human rights to be found in our country today. . . .

Henry Hyde "The Father of the Modern Pro-Life Movement"

President Bush on Congressman Henry Hyde (to whom he awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom):

“He used his persuasive powers for noble causes. He stood for a strong and purposeful America — confident in freedom's advance, and firm in freedom's defense. He stood for limited, accountable government, and the equality of every person before the law. He was a gallant champion of the weak and forgotten, and a fearless defender of life in all its seasons. Henry Hyde spoke of controversial matters with intellectual honesty and without rancor.”

See also: A Life for Life: Henry Hyde's Legacy National Review Symposium with Robert P. George, Kate O'Beirne, Tom DeLay, Carl Anderson, Helen Alvare and others.

The National Right to Life has a lengthy tribute - heralding him as "the father of the modern pro-life movement for his introduction and sponsorhip of the amendment which bears his name:

Perhaps Hyde's best-remembered commentary on the issue of abortion is this quote:

When the time comes as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I've often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God – and a terror will rip through your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there will be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world – and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, 'Spare him because he loved us,' – and God will look at you and say not, 'Did you succeed?' but 'Did you try?'

It is safe to say that Congressman Henry Hyde not only tried to save the most defenseless among us, but that he has succeeded on a level of which most can only dream. His efforts, his victories, his leadership and his friendship are deeply appreciated by the National Right to Life Committee and by pro-life citizens across this nation.

Crisis' Tribute to Rick Santorum

Lightning Rod: The Return of Rick Santorum, by Joan Frawley Desmond. Crisis June 2007:

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania) knew he had lost his re-election fight at 5 p.m. on Election Day. After receiving the news, he joined his wife, Karen, and their six children at their hotel suite. The Santorums always planned to “finish well.” Now, that meant taking their children with them when they voted at the Penn Hills polling station. The Santorums capped the evening with the celebration of Mass. They included Rick’s winning opponent, State Treasurer Bob Casey, in their prayers, as they had every day during that long campaign. One attendee remembers “a beautiful Mass, filled with grace.”

At 8 p.m., Rick Santorum officially lost the election and congratulated Casey on his victory. Soon after, television personality Sean Hannity called to express his regrets. Santorum responded, “Why?” He felt at peace. . . .

What an inspiring way to end a political race. Would that all of our candidates had that kind of class! -- This from good article from Crisis (yes, I'm catching up on old issues) on the post-election doings of former Senator Rick Santorum. He is now working for the Ethics and Public Policy Center, heading their Program to Protect America's Freedom "to identify, study, and heighten awareness of the threats to America and the West from a growing array of anti-Western forces and states that increasingly cast a shadow over our future and that violate religious liberty around the world."

The article addresses' Santorum's controversial decision to back Sen. Arlen Specter during the 2004 presidential race:

Santorum’s willingness to make choices that run counter to his own self-interest has even hurt him with his natural allies—the GOP’s conservative base. Back in 2004, his decision to endorse Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania), a pro-abortion stalwart poised to command the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee, rather than Rep. Pat Toomey, his pro-life challenger, angered many conservatives. But those close to him say he believed he had no choice. At the time, he was certain that Bush would have a chance to nominate a justice for the nation’s highest court, but the party lacked the Senate majority it needed to confirm a nominee. The conservative base mistrusted Specter, but he could win in a general election. Toomey could not. When Specter’s victory at the polls was confirmed, recalls one friend, “Rick felt nothing. He turned off the television and went to bed. As a Senate leader, he needed Specter’s vote; he needed to get this done.”

The internecine party fight embittered pro-life Republicans, though most concede that Specter performed well during the recent Supreme Court confirmation battles. The deeper problem is that conservative activists believe that the GOP leadership exploits its political networks during election time but doesn’t work hard enough to secure vital anti-abortion and pro-marriage legislation. The irony, of course, is that no one accomplished more for the pro-life movement during his Senate career than Rick Santorum. He played a critical role in the passage of several key bills: the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Sponsorship of these bills reflected an incremental pro-life strategy to ban abortion by reclaiming the moral high ground—exposing the brutality of abortion procedures and affirming the fundamental dignity of unborn human life. On the Senate floor, Santorum was the undaunted general of the campaign.

The article goes on to cite Santorum's 1999 exchange with Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of California, which encapsulates the perverse irrationality of the Democratic Party's position on abortion:

Santorum: What we are talking about here with partial birth, as the senator from California knows, is a baby is in the process of being born—

Boxer: “The process of being born.” This is why this conversation makes no sense, because to me it is obvious when a baby is born. To you it isn’t obvious.

Santorum: Maybe you can make it obvious to me. So what you are suggesting is if the baby’s foot is still inside of the mother, that baby can then still be killed.

Boxer: No, I am not suggesting that in any way!

Santorum: I am asking.

Boxer: I am absolutely not suggesting that. You asked me a question, in essence, when the baby is born.

Santorum: I am asking you again. Can you answer that?

Boxer: I will answer the question when the baby is born. The baby is born when the baby is outside the mother’s body. The baby is born.

Santorum: . . . But, again, what you are suggesting is if the baby’s toe is inside the mother, you can, in fact, kill that baby.

Boxer: Absolutely not.

Santorum: OK. So if the baby’s toe is in, you can’t kill the baby. How about if the baby’s foot is in?

Boxer: You are the one who is making these statements.

Santorum: We are trying to draw a line here.

Boxer: I am not answering these questions! I am not answering these questions.

Henry Hyde - Tireless Defender of the Unborn, RIP

Rep. Henry Hyde, a Catholic from Illinois who recently received the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his tireless work in Congress to protect the unborn, has passed away.

Requiscat in pace.

(Hat tip: Alexham at Vox Nova)


UPDATE
National Review's editorial on Rep. Hyde's passing: "The Honorable Mr. Hyde":

... He will be most remembered for the Hyde Amendment. First passed in 1976, when Hyde was new to Washington, it bans the public funding of abortions though Medicaid. The year before it passed, the federal government had financed 300,000 abortions for low-income women. Afterward, this number dropped essentially to zero — the women either found another way to pay for their abortions or chose life for their unborn children. The National Right to Life Committee has estimated, conservatively, that the Hyde Amendment has prevented at least one million abortions. That’s one million Americans who are alive today because of Henry Hyde.

The Hyde Amendment has proven remarkably durable, undergoing only one important revision. In 1993, Congress added rape and incest exceptions to the life-of-the-mother clause that had been in place from the start. It is without question the most important piece of pro-life legislation ever to pass Congress...

UPDATE # 2
More from National Review on Rep. Hyde's passing, this time from David Freddoso writing at The Corner:

Hyde at Notre Dame
Everyone remembers the famous [ED.: rather, infamous] Mario Cuomo speech at Notre Dame, in which he urged Catholics to keep right and wrong to themselves when it comes to abortion. But how many people remember that shortly after his speech, conservatives at Notre Dame invited Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) to speak on the topic of religion in public life?

The Associated Press covered his speech on September 24, 1984, as true today as it ever was ...

[More]

Rich Leonardi examines "The Pro Lifer's Dilemma" next Fall and the suggestions of Russel Shaw, George Weigel and Archbishop Chaput:

What say you? Could you explain pulling the lever for a "President Guiliani (or Romney)" to Christ and abortion's 47 million victims?

Cardinal O'Malley: Catholics Backing Pro-Abortion Democrats "Borders on Scandal"

(Hat tip: Opinionated Catholic)

The Boston Globe reports:

BALTIMORE - Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston, saying the Democratic Party has been persistently hostile to opponents of abortion rights, asserted yesterday that the support of many Catholics for Democratic candidates "borders on scandal."

In his sharpest comments about the political landscape since he was installed as archbishop of Boston four years ago, O'Malley made clear that, despite his differences with the Republican Party over immigration policy, capital punishment, economic issues, and the war in Iraq, he views abortion as the most important moral issue facing policymakers.

"I think the Democratic Party, which has been in many parts of the country traditionally the party which Catholics have supported, has been extremely insensitive to the church's position, on the gospel of life in particular, and on other moral issues," O'Malley said.

Acknowledging that Catholic voters in Massachusetts generally support Democratic candidates who are in favor of abortion rights, O'Malley said, "I think that, at times, it borders on scandal as far as I'm concerned."

"However, when I challenge people about this, they say, 'Well, bishop, we're not supporting [abortion rights],' " he said. "I think there's a need for people to very actively dissociate themselves from those unacceptable positions, and I think if they did that, then the party would have to change."

[Read the whole thing]

(emphasis added)

Henry Hyde to Get Presidential Medal of Freedom for Opposing Abortion

(Hat tip: PewSitter.com)

From LifeNews.com:

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Former member of Congress Henry Hyde will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom next Monday for his work opposing abortion. For decades, after his landmark Hyde Amendment stopped federal funding of virtually all abortions, Hyde became the pro-life movement's elder statesman on Capitol Hill.

Hyde was first elected to the House in 1974 and served as chairman of the House International Relations Committee and the House Judiciary Committee from 1995 to 2001.

In those positions, Hyde advanced pro-life legislation and worked to stop using taxpayer dollars to subsidize abortions in other countries.

Hyde's lasting legacy will be the federal Hyde amendment, which has prevented federal tax dollars from being used to fund almost all abortions since 1976. The Supreme Court heard a case in 1980 challenging the law and upheld it as constitutional.

[More]

40 Days for Life

The pro-life movement is on the offensive against Planned Parenthood:

"This fall, 89 cities in 33 states across the nation will unite for a unique pro-life campaign called 40 Days for Life -- an intensive effort designed to raise awareness, save lives, bring healing, and prepare America for the beginning of the end of abortion.

The campaign will be conducted simultaneously in all locations from September 26 - November 4."

The main component of this campaign is peaceful vigil outside Planned Parenthood clinics or other abortion facilities. Here is the link to learn more and to see how you can help.

I attended the kickoff event in one city, Ann Arbor, Michigan, at the local Catholic charismatic parish. As usual, the most moving testimony was from two women who choose to be silent no more and to speak of the immense damage that abortion does to the mother involved. By the mercy and healing power of Jesus, these women are free today to live full lives and to speak truth to power courageously and prophetically. Although they still carry scars from their great error, they are able by the power of Jesus to move on, experience peace and joy, and now go about doing good and teaching others. Just the other day, another woman told me about the horrors of her own abortion and about the insidious workings of Planned Parenthood when she volunteered there years ago: exorbitant profit margins on birth control pills and suppression of information about the harmful consequences of abortion to the woman. She also told me that if anyone had intercepted her on the way to the abortion clinic and urged her to turn around, she would not have had the abortion.

This particular sin and others are at times like that: many are reluctant even as we begin the sin and are undergoing it. The lie of the devil is that we are on some kind of assembly line where we just can't stop the descent to hell. The truth is that we are really free and can choose to stop the madness as we begin to slide into sin. Too many women have been "hustled" through fear, lies, propaganda, and pressure into scarring themselves permanently with abortion. The same woman told me that she tried to interrupt the abortion as it was proceeding, but was told that it was already too late. Many times we slide into disaster even while we recognize that it is a disaster. That's why we have to remind ourselves that in Jesus we are always free to say no to the machinations of evil. We have to learn to say no and to exercise our freedom to be sane.

Let's be clear: Planned Parenthood is an umbrella term for a network of death camps for infants spread throughout the United States. The roots of this evil lie in the fornication culture that exploded onto the American scene in the sixties and is now considered "normal" in America. The most outrageous bad fruit of a fornication culture is the murder of children. Sin works that way. The devil works that way: one outrage leads to another until you get to the ultimate outrage--child sacrifice in modern America for personal convenience and as a form of after-the-fact birth control. We even have one major political party--the Democratic Party--that has sold its soul to the maintenance of this contemporary holocaust.