Tag Archives: Abortion

McCarthy: Pastors, staffers prepared to deal with Supreme Court marriage decision – Illinois Review

McCarthy: Pastors, staffers prepared to deal with Supreme Court marriage decision – Illinois Review.

Frequent commenter to this blog Margaret McCarthy covers  Daniel McConchie, Vice President of Government Affairs for Americans United for Life, in a Grayslake IL presentation, including threats to conscience, including:

Here in Illinois, [where] Holy Family Catholic Church in Inverness is faced with a lawsuit over employment discrimination by Colin Collette because he was fired when he married his male partner.

In Illinois, we have had The “Illinois Right of Conscience” [as] one of the strongest protections for religious objections . . . successfully used to protect a Catholic pharmacist from civil penalty when he refused to supply a customer with abortificient drugs.

Currently, SB 1564 . . . passed and . . . before the General Assembly, would weaken those protections.

Chicago Tribune columnist and blogger Dennis Byrne gave us a look at this book in April as applying to abortion.

As if we weren’t looking, pro-choice forces this week are pushing an anti-conscience abortion bill through the Illinois Legislature.

Illinois Senate Bill 1564, which rewrites theHealth Care Right of Conscience Act, is designed to cripple or shut down  pregnancy resource centers, such asAid for Womenand theWomen’s Center, that offer womenalternatives to abortion.  Ironically, the bill reduces choices for women and takes direct aim at health care providers whose conscience (whether religiously inspired or for logical reasons) does not allow them to participate in abortions.

That means that workers atpregnancy crisis centers would have to violate their conscience by describing the “benefits” of abortion and refer clients to abortion clinics.

The bill is presumed also to cover same-sex confrontations, McCarthy reports:

For several years, the homosexual lobby has been aggressively seeking out businesses whose owners refused on religious grounds to provide services for their prospective weddings. When refused, the couples sued, citing discrimination based on already existing laws permitting gay marriage. 

McConchie cited numerous cases across the country of florists, caterers, wedding chapels, bakers that were singled out for attack.  Some were defended successfully, others were fined and/or put out of business.

McConchie was blunt about it, warning his Christ Church “Crossroads” audience, “You may not be interested in politics, but if you don’t pay attention, politics will roll over you.”

Advertisements

Thank God for abortion?

​Loyola U.-Chicago lays an egg:

One day before the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Loyola University Chicago will host a journalist who once thanked God for abortion on television.​

​Woe is us. Thing is, top- or middle-level Romantic Catholic leaders ​just want abortion to go away, not so much in real life as in public discourse. It’s an embarrassment, interferes with the business they want to conduct. They just aren’t interested.

Let’s hear it for the new Chicago archbishop, the good and (for now) the merely not so good . . .

A Spokane supporter of Chicago’s incoming archbishop:

“This guy is not lukewarm about anything,” said Rob McCann, executive director of the local Catholic Charities, the diocese’s social ministry arm. “He’s a guy that doesn’t shy from a fight, and that’s exactly what the Catholic Church needs.”

He treads lightly where gummint is concerned, however, endorsing ObamaCare no matter what and shying away from at least one major social problem:

He launched an effort to enroll thousands of eastern Washington’s poor in health care under the Affordable Care Act, despite the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ opposition to the law’s contraception mandate.

And, shortly after arriving in Spokane, he would not endorse curbside vigils outside abortion clinics, which drew the ire of local opponents of abortion rights.

On the other hand, he knows how to run things:

From the beginning, Cupich focused on untangling the legal mess [remaining from
bankruptcy and other sex-abuse-related issued], according to some pastors within the diocese, who praised his shrewd administrative skills.

At the same time, those within the diocese said his rigorous work ethic drove various outreach efforts that helped rally the congregation.

All in all, what with programmatic and bully-pulpit injections of new life into parish school financing and outreach, including to migrant farm workers,

“His legacy is the momentum from a time of darkness to a time of great hope and enthusiasm, in just four years,” McCann said. “And in the cycle of the Catholic Church, where everything moves at prehistoric speeds, that’s amazing.”

Like Pope Francis, he’s a house-cleaner:

“He doesn’t believe in this privileged clerical class that can get by with whatever because they’re priests, bishops or deacons or chancery officials,” [Rev. Mike] Savelesky [vicar general for
internal matters] said. “He expects high personal integrity.”

As for anti-abortion vigils, he took a conservative position, temperamentally and logistically, endorsing “an education model that asked priests to ‘create new openings for learning and reduce obstacles.'” A sort of make-as-few-waves-as possible pragmatism strategy.

Which means he’s going to talk about it and preach about it, etc.? Old openings not working? What are some new ones? How reduce obstacles?

Finally, from this news conference watcher Saturday morning: The incoming archbishop did very well. Showed he will make good use of the television and radio pulpit which he does not directly control.

(Card. George did well too, btw, neatly reiterating to Jay Levine, who had asked him how he felt, that the question is what he thought. How so-and-so felt being in the category of “Otherwise, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?”)

Finally finally, is it possible that Abp Cupich will address the state of the world, that is, the Catholic New World newspaper, which in my opinion can use an injection or two . . .

Your classic Dem, Lilly of Oak Park and elsewhere in gerrymandered district

She’s Mama Santa Claus, taxing, spending, loosening restrictions for constituents, adding them for employers, smiling all the while.

There have been updates to your [Vote
Smart
] tracked items. Below are changes you may be interested in.

Camille Lilly voted Yea(Concurrence Vote) on HB 105 – Authorizes Election Day Voter Registration – Thu, Sep 18 at 09:00:19
Camille Lilly voted Co-sponsor(Introduced) on SB 741 – Expands Medicaid Services – Thu, Sep 18 at 09:22:12
Camille Lilly voted Yea(Passage With Amendment) on SB 741 – Expands Medicaid Services – Thu, Sep 18 at 09:35:32
Camille Lilly voted Co-sponsor(Introduced) on HB 8 – Requires Accommodations for Pregnant Workers – Thu, Sep 18 at 09:55:09
Camille Lilly voted Yea(Passage) on HB 8 – Requires Accommodations for Pregnant Workers – Thu, Sep 18 at 09:55:47
Camille Lilly was rated 0 by Illinois Citizens for Life – Thu, Sep 18 at 12:20:04

Not so much for the unborn, however, as we see in that last one. She’s convinced there’s no human being there, having given the matter careful consideration, apparently. Sure.

The black-robed regiment on call . . .

Clergy to the pulpit barricades!

AURORA IL – Sunday evening, the Illinois Family Institute hosted several hundred Illinoisans who gathered at Aurora Christian School to hear Pastor, Author, and Oklahoma State Representative Dan Fisher call for Illinois clergy to “wake up” and join a modern day Black Robed Regiment.

 

The Black Robed Regiment was the name the British placed on the American clergy during the Founding Era (a backhanded reference to the black robes they wore). The British blamed the Black Robed Regiment for American Independence, and American leaders agreed

” We’re all Catholics now,” the Episcopal priest said at a rally in the Federal center a few years back, referring to the impingements on religious liberty fostered by ObamaCare.

Trouble is, in N. Illinois the RC priests are mostly liberals politically, if not in every other way.

However, I heard an excellent sermon pre-election day 2012 at St. John Vianney, Northbrook, at the 10 a.m. Latin mass. Quite good indeed.

Libertarians and abortion

From American Catholic about libertarians and abortion:

On my blog.

Thanks to the efforts of Ron Paul and other pro-life libertarians, I’ve found that it is no longer automatically assumed that libertarians are pro-abortion. This is as it should be.

From First Things:

Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 10:51 AM

Michael J. New:

  • After Roe v. Wade, conceptions increased by 30 percent.
  • The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect has reported that child abuse has increased more than 1,000 percent since Roe v. Wade.
  • The cohort of 14-to-17-year-olds born after the Roe v.Wade decision was much more likely to commit homicides than the cohort of 14-to-17-year-olds born before Roe v. Wade.

Civilization declined, in other words.

 

The Extremists Who Report the News

I’m sending Richard Mourdock some money and you should too. I want to explain to you just how extremist the media is on abortion and just how much spinning in favor of killing kids the media does.

According to Gallup polling, roughly a quarter of the population supports Richard Mourdock’s position on abortion — that the only exception in support of abortion should be the life of the mother.

According to Gallup polling, roughly a quarter of the population supports Barack Obama’s position on abortion — any time during pregnancy until the moment of delivery. And of course, we all know that Barack Obama actually supports infanticide too in cases when a baby survives an abortion attempt, but OMG Politifact claims otherwise!!!!!!!

When the media chooses to report stories about abortion, the media consistently chooses to report stories like Richard Mourdock’s statement and Todd Akin’s statement, both of whom believe that children conceived as a result of rape are still human beings entitled not to be ripped apart in utero and scrapped out of the womb or whatever procedure the child killers use these days. As an aside, during the Mourdock controversy few in the media reported that Mourdock’s Democratic opponent has sponsored pro-life legislation with Todd Akin.

. . . . .  . . . .

more more more more

This guy’s no turkey

Who’s this talking, president of your local pro-life league?

I see abortion as murder I am asking you: whats the difference between killing a baby inside a mothers womb and killing a baby after birth?

Nope, the “pronatalist” prime minister of Turkey.

Irish come out fighting

Hopey changey not working out at Notre Dame.  Nothing says more about this most obvious overreaching by the boy president.

Give a look at some nuts and bolts of it, noting while you are at it, this pungency:

The [legal] background [of the HHS mandate] is farcical. It represents administrative law brought to us by Laurel and Hardy, or Professor Irwin Corey, or the dictator of that Central American country featured in Woody Allen’s Bananas.

There are 12 suits, of course, each identically worded.  Chicago is not suing, but from Illinois, Springfield and Joliet are suing.  Can you imagine Chicago getting really serious about fighting Obama and the Dimmycrats? 

Cardinal George and his archdiocese are

“ . . . obviously deeply concerned about preserving the Catholic identity of Catholic educational, health care and social service organizations,” George said in a statement. “The Archdiocese therefore entirely supports the actions of the Catholic dioceses and organizations that have brought suit against the Department of Health and Human Services for violating the heretofore constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom of Catholic institutions.”

Nicely, if professorially, said.  But not part of the suit?  Why not?

Vegans for life? Not quite

The case for not eating meat, by David Sirota, is also a case for mandatory scanning of fetus by abortion-seekers, but Sirota doesn’t make the fetus case.

One of his [11] commenters notes this: “Sirota echoes an argument from the anti-abortion folks.” He or she is answered with this: “Only if the mothers eat the fetuses.” Followed by: “first they come for the placenta…. ”

Heh-heh: having fun with the opposition, and this on the somewhat religion-oriented, firmly pacifist and other sort of leftist position-taking Truth Dig site.

%d bloggers like this: