Catholics Abandon the Unborn in the 44th Presidency

A simple web search for the order of presidential succession in the newly-minted Obama administration makes clear what a profound … Continued

A simple web search for the order of presidential succession in the newly-minted Obama administration makes clear what a profound debacle the ’08 election was for the pro-life movement in the United States. The country’s top leadership now looks like a Who’s Who of the National Abortion Rights Action League’s “100% pro-choice” club. Largely ignored in the last election, abortion remains a massively important political issue. Catholics who did so should be ashamed of themselves for voting with disregard for a ticket and party that is inimical to a central moral tenet of their Church’s teaching. Abortion kills.

This nation daily tolerates the willfully procured death of over 3,200 innocent and defenseless human beings, and that slaughter is an abomination far beyond other considerations that entered into electoral decisions last year. To maintain any sort of credible witness to the value of human life, Catholic leaders and faithful must choose to directly and publicly reengage the pro-life movement and to put John Paul II’s Gospel of Life at the very top of their social and political agendas in the battles that lie ahead.

The new Cabinet, White House staff and top Congressional leadership, several so-called “pro-choice Catholics” among them, look to be clearly unfriendly to the protection of embryonic life. From House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, voting records indicate a steeply pro-choice political trajectory for the coming years. (Vice President Biden actually received only a “mixed” pro-choice rating, based in part on his support of the partial birth abortion ban.) Worse than having these elected and appointed officials around for the coming term, can it be imagined that President Obama will not nominate as lifelong Supreme Court members jurists as radical on life issues as his cabinet and staff? The new administration is headed by a man who said that one of his first actions as President would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, as extreme a piece of pro-choice legislation as can be imagined. A clear and chilling harbinger of things to come, his first executive orders are likely to be targeted at overturning Bush era restrictions on using federal funds for abortions overseas and for research that destroys embryos.

The Respect Life community failed to make abortion a meaningful issue in the past election and the current situation is the sour fruit of that negligence. Catholics especially abandoned the unborn at the polls. At least 54% of those identifying themselves as Catholic supported President Obama, while “Church-going Catholics” voted 50% for McCain to Obama’s 49%. Either number demonstrates an inability in the ecclesial hierarchy and the lay leadership in the Catholic Pro-life movement to make a convincing argument about the nature of the abortion act and the issue’s relative importance versus other weighty but lesser political questions such as the election of African-American leaders, the economy, or the war on terror.

Abortion kills and its deadly impact is orders of magnitude beyond the violence of the Iraq war or any indignities visited upon detainees held at Guantanamo. However many millions of visitors may have journeyed to the Capital for this week’s inaugural, it is certain that several million Americans never had the slightest chance of making it to the festivities. At least 45 million to be more accurate: all those aborted since the handing down of Roe v Wade. While the election of President Obama means good things for progress in racial integration in this nation, it cannot be ignored that abortion continues to heavily disproportionately target African-Americans, 13 million since 1973.

While claims that embryos and fetuses are members of the human family are often dismissed as based on faith alone or merely a matter of personal opinion, from a scientific standpoint this is entirely untrue. At the moment of conception, when egg meets sperm, either in the petri dish or the fallopian tube, the complete genetic blueprint of a new unique human individual comes together. This is scientific fact. It was at the moment of conception that each and every reader of this article began to journey through the developmental stages of life. Those destroyed in an abortion are genetically human except under the most bizarre circumstances. They are also certainly alive, consuming nutrients, excreting waste products of metabolism, growing, possessing the potential to reproduce, and responding to external stimuli such as local pH, availability of oxygen, and the presence of hormones in the fetal and maternal circulation. Abortion kills a human being in the earliest days, weeks or months of its development, period.

Today, as the bunting comes down and crews disassemble the reviewing stands on Pennsylvania Avenue, the annual March for Life will stream quietly by the Capitol dome and Congress will prepare to debate the Freedom of Choice Act as a first order of business. This government is poised to push the pro-life movement in America into oblivion. Whether they decide to do so in the pulpit, the media, or in their extensive school networks, bishops, clergy and lay leaders in the Catholic Church will have to motivate their flocks to action if they want to see any movement out of the moral quagmire this country finds itself in on abortion.

Dr. William Blazek, a Jesuit scholastic and physician, is a board certified specialist in Internal Medicine and a Research Scholar in the Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University School of Medicine. He teaches ethics and clinical skills as an Adjunct Assistant Professor while preparing for ordination to priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church.

Written by

  • kjohnson3

    A few comments on Dr. Blazek’s comments:”Largely ignored in the last election, abortion remains a massively important political issue.”Apparently it doesn’t. Anti-abortion factions may hope to restoke fundamentalist Christian outrage to once again raise abortion to the level of a “massively important political issue,” but it’s not going to happen. As a political position, it’s dead in the water.”This nation daily tolerates the willfully procured death of over 3,200 innocent and defenseless human beings…”First of all, what this nation accepts is the lawfully procured termination of embryonic life. Second, that figure is 3,200 sounds just a teensy bit inflated. If it were accurate, then the outlawing of abortion would result in 1,168,000 new Americans each year. That’s preposterous.”Abortion kills a human being in the earliest days, weeks or months of its development, period.”If that were the case, American citizens would be allowed to take “the unborn” as dependent tax deductions. Try getting THAT through Congress.The most annoying thing about diatribes like this one is their utter and complete hypocrisy. If Blazek is truly concerned about the overturning of Bush-era “restrictions on…research that destroys embryos,” we should be able to assume that he likewise opposes the fertility treatments and freezing of embryos that result in this sacred surplus. If he doesn’t oppose activities in which embryonic life is wantonly created for the convenience of humans, then he has no business lecturing about the “immorality” of using these embryos in support of life-saving research.However, all of this is moot. With this essay, Blazek will most certainly have impressed his Catholic mentors and nicely greased his way on the path to priesthood.

  • CCNL

    What BO et al, the new leader of the Immoral Majority, failed to mention in the inaugural addresses and sermons:Intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control in this country with on average one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone. (CDC data)from the CDC-2006″Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain STDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.”How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Even condoms if they are even used are not full/fool proof. Might a list of those having a STD posted on the Internet help? Sounds good to me!!!! Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???And who put the current leadership in their offices?? The fastest growing voting demographic: The 70 million “mothers and fathers of aborted children” whose ranks grow by two million per year.Doing the Math: The CDC has recorded and published the number of abortions done in the USA each year up to 2003. The rate on average was one million abortions per year. That comes to ~35 million abortions and ~70 million voting-age “mothers and fathers” of these aborted children. (The final popular vote count was 69,456,897 for Obama and 59,934,786 for McCain. )And of course they voted for the pro-choice candidate, one Barack H. Obama, the It should read: “The First President Elected by the “Mothers and Fathers” of 35 Million Aborted The result would have been the same for any pro-choice candidate who won the primary election.And voting out the new leaders of the Immoral Majority will be almost impossible considering the numbers.

  • emonty

    Please see the ‘pro-life record’ of the pro-life presidents and legislative majorities that existed for 20 out of the last 28 years. Tell me again that my votes for or against candidates based on their ‘life’ issues have made any difference and that I should be ‘ashamed’ of myself. Also please note Mr. McCain’s position on embryonic stem cell research and explain how it was in any way different than Mr. Obama’s.As a potential priest perhaps you need to understand that many of the faithful are still faithful to our beliefs but not to the priests and bishops who seem willing to tell us how to protect the unborn with our votes but could not protect the children entrusted to them nor be willing to honestly address the problem. The resulting child abuse scandal is something much more shameful than a vote for Obama which may or may not have anything to do with pro-life issues. When I see priests and bishops resign in shame and publicly ask for forgiveness for what they did to our children perhaps, only perhaps, we can talk about what a shameful vote might consist of in other areas. I know how many priests and bishops voted already in terms of their actions, don’t lecture me.

  • wanatmindy

    In watching the inauguration and then the prayer service this morning, I wondered if others saw the elephant in the room.In Obama’s inaugural speech, he called upon parents to be willing to nurture a child. He talked about dignity for all.In her sermon this morning, Rev. Sharon Wright said, “With your swearing-in, Mr. President, the flame of America’s promise burns just a little brighter for every child in this land.”

  • rb-freedom-for-all

    Get ready! Now that the “pro-life” side is out of power, here come the violent attacks on clinics, doctors, clinic workers, and women who choose to go to a clinic, even if its not for an abortion. Violence was down while the “pro-life” side was winning the political fight. Now that the political tide has turned against them, you can expect them to react with their usual christian resort to violence against those that don’t agree with their religious views.

  • fox2

    abortion is one unfortunate issue – but there are others that shape the Catholic vote. there are so many social and environmental issues – abortion is only a personal choice not easily made. Social issues and ethics: The Pope called the war in Iraq an unjust war and certainly supports the Geneva conventions. (Yet the Christian right continues to support Bush’s war). The Pope called for the closure of Guantanamo and Abu Grave. The Church supports social justice. The war on drugs mostly divides families when a father is incarcerated for a minor offense. Our tax dollars should be spent on schools, health care, jobs and to support a health care system … so people can continue to raise their families and don’t need to make “a choice:”. thanks, r

  • Athena4

    People are tired of the same old arguments from the anti-choicers. Obama said that we should get past the “legal or illegal” argument and work together to see how we can reduce the number of abortions. And, quite frankly, people worry less about wedge issues like abortion when they just lost their job, their house is being foreclosed on, and their retirement savings disappeared. You people had control of Congress, the Presidency, and the courts for six out of eight years and you couldn’t push your issue through entirely. EVERY anti-abortion initiative on the ballot in every state lost. You need to start looking at why your message is being rejected. Maybe you can start by not spreading lies, such as saying that the Pill and IUDs cause abortions? Like the man said, put away childish things and start thinking like adults about the issue. Start offering some real solutions instead of the same tired old arguments.

  • amelia45

    It is wrong to vote for someone who is pro-life but sends our military to fight in unjustified wars, who lies to his people and tortures his enemies. But millions did because he is “pro-life.”Enough. Millions are out of work, our economy is in the tanks, we are in an unjustified war, too many of our children are not finishing high school, too many of us cannot get health care, we are trashing our ecology and depleting our energy resources globally, and on and on. There are other duties before God and man than stopping abortions. Many of the politicians who are pro-life ignored these other needs, actually helped create parts of this nightmare, or colluded in creating it. We should not ignore their culpability in acts which create misery just because they shout “hallelujah” when pro-life is mentioned. Get better supporters of pro-life and you will get more votes. In the meantime, cooperate with the pro-choicers of the Obama administation to reduce the number of abortions. That is a goal both sides share.

  • Farnaz2

    Evidently, it has escaped you as it has many others that this is not a Catholic theocracy. We have, here, this notion of separation of church and state. If your RC wants to continue to violate the requirements of its tax exempt status, by continuing to stick its great big nose into American political affairs, regarding choice or any other matter, you will not be surmised when an increasingly disgusted, activist public in dire financial straights, petitions to have the RC’s tax exemption revoked.

  • Farnaz2

    Sorry! Meant to write “surprised.”

  • theosnyder

    Clearly Dr. Blazek does not see any response to the massive abortion rate than the immediate over turn of Roe V. Wade. Many Catholics beg to differ on this issue of prudential judgement: abortion declines when humane economic policies are in place. That is one reason I voted for Obama. Further, over the last 35 years my Catholic Church has failed to convince America that abortion results in the death of a human being. The law will not change (ingoring for the moment the legal principle stare decisis) until the culture changes. Until then creating a “birth-friendly” evironment is the best pragmatic choice we can make following 35 years of failed effort that has simply provided political cover for politicians who reject the balance of Catholic social teaching. When the Catholic right noisily rejects the “seamless garment” integrating the pro-embryonic life ethic with the rest of Church social teaching as amounting to surrender, they reject the basic principle enunciated by John Paul II that the culture is basic to socially moral behavior. We will not see abortion limited to protection of the health of the mother without a supporting culture. Rejecting Roe v. Wadew with out that condition wil simply result in women seeking abortions in friendly states and nations, or worse, do it themselves. The death of segregation and the elimination of the racist Jim Crow legal code happened in the face of much opposition, however, there were enough while people whose attitudes had changed that it was possible for the politicians to act. The abortion issue will not be moved in favor of life without a much greater moral consensus by the electorate. Reduction in numbers by policies that support mothers is a great step in that direction.

  • phoenixresearch

    Blazek and poster CCNL are “Exhibit A” for why religion should be kept the Hell out of the public square.As a converted Catholic, I’d add especially Catholicism. The Church has a marvelous history re imposing its will and belief systems on people and governments, usually accompanied by torture, burning at the stake, and massacres in medieval times in Europe. In that light, the current-day anti-abortion rants are morally-bankrupt hypocrisy. See Matthew 7:1-5 if you don’t “get” that.That’s why we have separation of church and state here, to keep the hysterical preachings of self-anointed moral arbiters out of public policy.Amen to THAT.

  • Grandblvd03

    Most people in the United States don’t want catholics or other christian groups telling them what to do concerning abortion and other issues. That’s true in this election cycle and will be true from here on. Best that you all focus your attention on your own lives and sins.

  • relishfilms

    “How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start.” What is this a SCI FI MOVIE? You really want to make a pill that limits sexual arrousal? Wow, you must be a lot of fun. Looks like it’s been a long time since someone has had any type of sex.

  • TexLex

    Dr. Blazek reminds us that there are strains of Catholicism that are every bit as nutty as the Protestant evangelical loons.

  • aries4

    “abortion remains a massively important political issue” for only as long as stays legal, and any real attempts to over turn Roe V Wade would result in a massive Katrina sized loss of womens’ votes from whatever political party or individual politician was foolish/stupid enough to actually try it. Women are more numerous, social and civic minded and they VOTE!

  • meishere

    I wish the pro-“lifers” like Blazek would understand that even if abortion were illegal, abortions would still occur. In countries where it is illegal, women still terminate pregnancies — usually in unsafe environments. Plus, how can he justify voting for people like McCain and Bush who have no doubts about their war in Iraq, which killed hundreds of thousands little children? This article reeks of self-righteousness.

  • ElizabethinBoca

    Blazek, excellent article.You are so right that the slaughter of 3200 per day pales to nearly anything else that there could possibly be.I am dismayed by the anti-life comments already generated by your post. How could ANYONE condone the killing of another innocent human being. This isn’t a Catholic issue or Protestant or Jewish. This is a Human Race issue. It is wrong to kill innocent human beings, having them ripped to shreds, drowned, or their skulls crushed and brains sucked out. WHO could condone such actions? It’s amazing to me that prior posters could condone such action. Would they have also voted for Hitler based on his economic policies? It seems that they would.

  • semidouble

    Interesting to me are two facts:A: There are no pro lifers. They are only pro fetus. Once a child is born, the focus diappears. 28,000 children starve to death every day! I don’t see an uproar by any church about this horrible fact, let alone giving away some of the amassed wealth.B: 27% of all pregnancies end up as miscarriage. If there is a god, he is the most prolific abortionist of them all.To the superstitious crowd here: if you don’t likie abortions, DON’T HAVE ONE!

  • MeatSweats

    I belong to a ‘religion’ that promotes sexual promiscuity, drug use, alcoholism, gambling, homo and heterosexuality, and the choice to terminate pregnancy or not. However, I work for the greater good of the people by means of the research that I do to find more effective cancer treatments. I also help out with the local community organizations by participating in community service every month. I am not a bad person for doing all of these things and I do not attempt to impose my ‘religious’ beliefs on people that do not want to hear them and I certainly do not try to make people feel badly for not believing in the same things as me.

  • norriehoyt

    “Largely ignored in the last election, abortion remains a massively important political issue.”No it doesn’t.Abortion is an unpleasant topic for most people. They don’t want to think about abortions for the same reason that they don’t want to visualize pets being killed in animal shelters. Abortion and killing pets are both repugnant to the human mind.If people don’t want to think about something, that thing can’t become a “massively important political issue”.And, if people do think about outlawing abortion, they also immediately think of their female relatives, and what banning abortion would mean for them if they found themselves in a situation where they saw no way out except an abortion.

  • Paganplace

    I think where the ‘pro-life’ movement *failed* is in having previously swayed enough of the vote to two terms of *disaster for all our children* in order to what… Let some random pharmacist wave a cross and intrude on what’s between a woman and her doctor? Where you *failed* is in thinking your ‘one issue’ hyperbole justifies either the unjust *means,* the blindness to the reality of the situation that simply making abortion punishable won’t make it go stop, only hurt women and make it unregulatable, or the utter *incompetence and greed* of the people willing to use you to get them elections and keep hurting *all* children.You got in bed with the Republicans and with ignorance and tyrrany. These things failed.In fact, these things *increased* abortions. So you could *what?* Feel ‘mighty?’Calm down and let’s reduce unwanted pregnancies, and support mothers. And children. And the poor.

  • schaeffz

    I like the Muslim way. Cover up and keep all females out of sight of males other than fathers, brothers, and husbands. Of course, they still have sexual predators even in the Muslim world, so fathers and brothers would be too dangerous too, so…OK only husbands can see their wives, but only after their marriage is arranged by the fathers, neither of which know what the women looks like, which should be an advantage to the husband. What a wonderful surprise to open the “gift” of that woman he has married on the marriage bed. Opps, getting too romantic here. Wow, how Pro-Life that approach would be, especially for the woman, who never has to worry about primping up to attract a man! Or ever has to worry about getting a job, going to school, contributing positively to the world, other than the reason God made her, to bear children. No abortions in that world also. What a deal! Except, maybe the daddy wants a son and he gets a daughter and decides to throw her into the river cause he can’t afford to feed her, and anyway, what good are females for anyway. Yeh, keep that going until there are no more females left! Then there will never be the threat of abortions or murder in any way, because we all know the men are such peaceful beings and all that. Then finally all men will grow old and die too! Then God has finally rid his Good Earth of all Sin !!!!Just kidding.

  • MeatSweats

    By the way, a co-worker of mine who was overweight became pregnant at the beginning of 2008. She was thrilled at the thought of becoming a mother and I believe that she would have made a fantastic parent. However, about 5 months into her pregnancy, she developed a condition called preeclampsia. Preeclampsia is a rapidly progressive condition characterized by extremely high blood pressure and the presence of protein in the urine. Swelling, sudden weight gain, headaches and changes in vision are important symptoms that among others, put the child and mother at serious risk. She was forced to terminate her pregnancy because she was in danger of losing not only the life of her unborn child, but her own. She was devastated.

  • alfalfabill

    I am sick of “the government” (especially Democrats) being blamed for the number of abortions committed in the United States. Our government doesn’t abort babies, it is a personal decision made by a prospective mother. There is no personal moral accountability. Until the church deals directly with those individuals responsible and provides meaningful alternatives rather than continuing to point its finger at the government, nothing is going to change.

  • joelkaye

    There are many more important issues than abortion to deal with at this time for our country. Abortion is an individual not a political issue.

  • Chagasman

    I’m tired of the Catholic Church telling the American people to base their vote on a single issue. Abortion may be important to Dr. Blazek, but to most voters, there were many, many issues far more important that directly affected them and their votes. Stay out of politics, relgious fanatics!

  • jprfrog

    Thus the Pro-Lifers:Of fine-sounding talk they’ve no dearth.

  • Voicefortheunborn

    MATSWEATS:Your story about the co-worker with preeclampsia doesn’t add up. My wife had preeclampsia and we were told the only cure was have the child early (5 weeks in our case). Our son is now 4 months old and doing great. Being diagnosed with preeclampsia at 5 months is not uncommon and bedrest or hospital stay is most common until the child can be born. Either your co-worker was given very poor medical advice, is lieing, or you made this up to advance your agenda. Regardless, you should discontinue spreading this story because it’s grossly inaccurate.

  • Paganplace

    Yeah, Voice. Some ‘moral absolutist’ on the Internet should be allowed to tell some woman to die based on a story *he* could have made up. We have this profession in America, called *doctors.* They’ve been known to occasionally look at this thing called an ‘actual sick person’ and make this thing called a ‘diagnosis,’ and through this principle called ‘informed consent’ this thing called a ‘citizen’ makes this thing called a ‘decision’ based on this thing called ‘reality.’ Agenda? I think you’re the one who can’t imagine ‘compassion’ when ‘reality’ refuses to align with your political dogma and sense of entitlement to make yourself a self-appointed judge. Feh.

  • Voicefortheunborn

    “Doctors” you say? So that’s what the Dr. stood for when I worked at Mayo Clinic.Forgive me for offending but I just wanted to point out that abortion as a cure for preeclampsia isn’t the only option and wasn’t even suggested in our case.My son isn’t dogma. He’s a real person and has been since conception.

  • CCNL

    28,000 babies starve to death every day??Reliable references please!!!

  • CCNL

    Thou shalt not kill!!! Tis a rule not only found in the Bible but also found in the ancient and evolutionary rules of humankind.With respect to destroying sperm (or eggs) as being akin to abortion, give us a break!!! Human male sperm is analogous to the millions of tons of inactive deuterium floating harmlessly in the ocean but combine it in a fusion reaction, it becomes the energy of the Sun. And so a growing baby is considered by some to be nothing more than an infection? Talk about having no respect for life!!!!! And Nature or Nature’s God is the #1 taker of everyone’s life. That gives some rational for killing the unborn or those suffering from dementia, mental disease or Alzheimer’s or anyone who might inconvenience your life??? We constantly battle the forces of nature. We do not succumb to these forces by eliminating defenseless children!!!!!

  • Joden

    I am responding to the opinion of Dr. William Blazek. I find this opinion to be an example of why the so called “Pro Life Movement” is in difficulty these days. I am a Catholic and I voted for President Obama in good faith. When the “Pro Life Movement” gets real about the issue you will understand that judgementalism only inhibts dialogue on this important matter.Many Catholics believe in the “Consistent Life Ethic” and voted their conscience from this perspective, in my opinion. I certainly did. You cannot engage in name calling if you wish to be taken seriously.The Pro Life Movement (PLM) needs to come down to earth and start working with others in reducing abortions. The my way, or the highway mentality of the PLM will only alienate voters.The Bishops do not speak for Catholic Voters. O yes they can threaten to deny us the Eucharist, but that is also becoming a meaningless jesture.Dialogue is the answer, not finger pointing.

  • eeyore1

    Thank-you, Dr. Blazek. Abortion is akin to slavery. Babies at any stage within the womb have no say in whether they live or die. They are subject to their mother’s decision “right”. When she decides, for whatever reason, she does not want her child, the baby is subjected to torture via means of head puncture, burns, disection, etc., in order to be removed from the womb. Said baby feels fear, and tries but cannot get away from the imminent danger. Likewise, slaves were subjected to their master’s torture and mistreatment, because it was the master’s “RIGHT”. It was a hidious time in history, and abortion is equally a hidious time in history, the rights of the unborn being violated – they are American citizens too, but are given no “rights”. A sad, sad, commentary on America – the land of the “free”, and home of the brave.

  • sail19931

    Dr. Blazek’s comments are right on. American Catholics have abandoned their morals because they think Obama will enhance their purse. More than being merely ashamed they are in a grave state of sin and all Catholics who voted for Obama should be hauling themselves to confession ASAP! (I’m not much for quoting the bible but this is so close to this issue.) Deuteronomy 30:19 “I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your decendents may live”. Because I’m Catholic am I not allowed to speak and vote as I choose? Because ‘thou shalt not steal” is also a Judeo/Christian belief should I abandon that as well and vote only for theiving politicians. I’m supposed to set aside my morals when I step into the ballot box?My heart aches at the ignorance and hatred that spew from those of you that endorse a society that promotes a culture of death. That believes the mutilation of babies in and out of the womb is a valid “choice”. Most of you are probably not even aware of what an early term abortion entails let alone a partial birth one. Lets try it out on an adult and see if you like having scissors jammed into your skull and your brains vacuumed out. At the very least you should get your collective heads out of your behinds and know what it is that you are voting for.May God save this once great nation before it devotes itself entirely to promoting such evil despicably acts.

  • Athena4

    Blah, blah, blah… Same old arguments. Try coming up with some solutions to the problem, instead of calling us baby-killers and Nazis. BTW, the Nazis BANNED abortion for all non-Jewish women. Then again, if you would read your history books, you’d find that out. If abortion is akin to murder, you have the situation similar to a murder-for-hire. How many years in prison will a woman be sentenced to for having an abortion?

  • Bios

    Before attempting to answer complex questions concerning abortion, it might be appropriate to focus first on the practical aspect and ask:How many people abort simply because they can?How many people abort with genuine and valid motive?More complex questions would be:Could rape or a life threatening situation be considered a genuine motive?When does human life begin?I think that the answers to these or similar questions can better be cracked through extensive, intelligent, straightforward and brutally honest debate.Complex questions demand complex answers.

  • pattymon

    I encourage everyone to look up Dr Bernard Nathanson…one of the founders of NARAL and the entire abortion movement. He performed thousands and thousands of abortions but with the birth of the ultrasound he started to have some doubts. He has written “aborting america” and other books as well. he is now stridently pro life.

  • pattymon

    I encourage everyone to look up Dr Bernard Nathanson…one of the founders of NARAL and the entire abortion movement. He performed thousands and thousands of abortions but with the birth of the ultrasound he started to have some doubts. He has written “aborting america” and other books as well. he is now stridently pro life.

  • dadugganagain

    Father Balzek’s hyperventilation over the new administration is a great example of the kind of new life the new administration has breathed into the “pro-life” movement. Content to watch the abortion and teen pregnancy rates rise during eight years of Republican stewardship, with Roe v. Wade still on the books, despite a Conservative Catholic majority on the Supreme Court, the Karl Rove Catholics had little to do and less to think about. When you already belong to the “party of life,” apparently all state-sponsored killing, except abortion, is merely collateral damage in the war of who is most morally righteous. It’s interesting, but not surprising, that Father Balzek refers to the “Gospel” of John Paul II, instead of the Gospel of Jesus. It’s pretty sure he hasn’t been reading the Gospel of Pope Benedict, who is definitely not leading the Church in the direction of the “abortion-is-the-only-true-evil pro-lifers.”

  • sail19931

    “Dr. Blazek reminds us that there are strains of Catholicism that are every bit as nutty as the Protestant evangelical loons.”You obviously know nothing about Catholicism. The same can be said of some Catholic posters here who want to throw the entire church under the bus because of the actions a very small percentage of child abusing priests and their enablers (who are being routed out of the church) or who use the War in Iraq as an excuse to vote in endorsement of another 35 million dead babies. There are no “strains” of Catholicism. We do not have a “pick and choose what you feel like believing” option like many protestant churches. Our tenets are clearly defined, hence the sin incurred when voting for pro-abortion candidates. You’re either a Catholic in a state of grace or you’re a Catholic whose soul is in mortal danger of spending eternity in hell. And every Catholic knows that to receive the Holy Eucharist while in a state of sin is itself a sin. If the Church denies pro-abortion voters Holy Communion then it is doing your soul a favor. Sadly, many Catholics do not comprehend or appreciate the great gift God gives us at each and every Mass. The Eucharist is at the very center of the Catholic faith. There are many miracles throughout the ages associated with the Holy Eucharist (Saints have given their lives to protect it) and to give up receiving Holy Communion so easily is to reject God and the sacrifice Jesus made so that we could have eternal life.

  • Mohegan

    Without the major media greasing the skids at every turn it is likely this election would have been extremely close. A relentless anti-Bush message for years compounded by an insatiable desire to destroy all Obama opposition contributed more than even George Soros could muster making the major American media not simply just the reporters of history but also the shapers of it. Yes, many so-called Catholics confessed to contributing to his victory yet every single post-election poll regarding Obama’s social policy stances reveal the voters were at minimum confused and at worst duped into accepting a candidate who’s true positions on the domestic agenda are far more radical than the vast majority of voters have expressed their views to be. This confusion, I posit, was not the result of random ineptitude on the part of voters but rather the intended state created by the lock-step message from the major media pounded home at every turn day after day leading up to the election. The solution? For church leadership the time is well past due to use the pulpit to cry out for justice for all, especially the innocents being slaughtered every 20 seconds. Fear is no friend to those in need and for too long too many have abandoned their rightful voice to lead the charge to call for the emancipation of the children allowed to be murdered every minute of every day since January 22, 1973. Either every human life is worthy of protecion because we are all made in God’s image or all our lives are simply hanging by a tenuous thread to be broken once society deems us to join the ranks of oxygen wasters. The only question is what will it take to unleash the backlash of righteous reaction simmering within the remaining core of Americans knowing in their hearts and heads what is right but who have in recent elections drank the media kool-aid duping them into accepting counterfeit crusaders for change. All of us shall come to see 2008 as the year when the major media dogpiled in unison to advance an agenda they personally embrace while ignoring the canons of their calling.

  • CCNL

    As per BO’s press release yesterday, the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the word “adoption” is not in his vocabulary!!!!What a great healing it would be if he and his wife adopted a child!!!!

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Here some suggestions about what the Catholic Church can do to reduce abortions:1. Educate ALL the Catholics and ensure there are no pro-abortion Catholics, not just in belief but also in practice. That would take care of 25% of the US population.2. Keep the discussion of abortion and contraception separate. When it is discussed in the same breath, the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. 3. The Catholic Church should consider including in its teaching some gray areas, for example abortion when there is a medical indication, like ectopic pregnancy etc. The teaching will thus remain humane. To teach that if the mother’s life is at risk due to a pregnancy both should die is somewhat unproductive and lacks charity. Abortion for medical indication is indeed so rare that the Catholic Church could in good conscience consider permitting it as the lesser of the two evils. Inflexible legalism that borders on lack of charity makes people want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. 4. The anti-abortion campaigns should always focus on human embryology and human right of the unborn child, so that even humanitarian atheists can easily join in.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Just because the law permits abortion it is no reason for any Catholic to resort to it. Smoking is harmful and legal, yet no one is obliged to smoke. Catholics can abstain from aborting their unborn children even if the law of the land permits it. The road to overturning Roe vs Wade is long and hard. The pro-abortion mindset has been 35 years in the making and it is intricately linked with the sexual revolution and the freedom of the woman to have sex without any consequences. So the pro-abortionists are in actual fact fighting for the woman’s right to have sex without consequences, even if it comes with the ultimate price for the unborn child.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    When religious organizations adjust their teaching to suit the popular trend on abortion, change is impossible to achieve in the larger society. The Catholic Church will have to be remain content if it can convince its own that abortion is wrong and prevent every Catholic from resorting to abortion. Since the Catholic is more likely to follow the popular culture, the task of the Catholic Church is immense. Trying to force change in the law of the land is only one step among many. But stopping abortion among Catholics is the most important duty of the Catholic Church. Preventing the use of contraceptives is working against commonsense.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Since President Obama does not order any Catholic to abort their children, it is somewhat ridiculous to hold him responsible for the actions of Catholics who know better and still abort their children. Unless voting for President Obama meant that every Catholic would automatically be forced to abort their children, it is difficult to see how Catholics have committed a sin because they voted for someone who can influence policies other than abortion that does affect them directly. It is better to teach every Catholic that they do not have to opt for abortion even if the law of the land permits it just as a Catholic is not forced to smoke or have premarital/extramarital sex even though it is not illegal.

  • HarrisTheYounger

    KJOHNSON3: Nothing to add. Well said.

  • HarrisTheYounger

    Don’t despair. You’ll find a new arbitrary topic to display your histrionic, religious fake-outrage over, I’m sure.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    KJOHNSON3:You should read the Hippocratic Oath sometime. He was a Greek pagan, the Father of Western Medicine. Human physiology has not changed much since his time. Even Roe vs Wade does not have the power to change human embryology. Only what rights are awarded to an unborn child has been changed. A law that has been made by man can be changed by man. Simple.

  • rookieonedge

    Great article! Great analysis from Dr. William Blazek, “Catholics Abandon the Unborn During the 44th Presidency.”I was reading a question and answer column in “The Wanderer” regarding the recent debacle at the polls regarding abortion. The question asked:”I can’t help but wonder if our bishops had spoken out more forcefully on abortion over the years whether there would still be more than a million abortions each year and whether so-called Catholic politicians would still be thumbing their noses at the Church. What do you think?”Catholic Replies by James J. Drummey gave a lengthy answer which I’ll try to sum up. Drummy first gave the names of the few bishops who spoke out consistently. He also mentioned that there was plenty of guidance from the Magisterium and gave examples. What he pointed out so succinctly, however, was that early in the debate after Roe was decided, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops passed a resolution November, 1973 that basically made clear that it was necessary to provide protections “for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of all human beings, before as well as after birth.” A few months later, four cardinals testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments about the need for a human life amendment to the Constitution. John Cardinal Krol of Philadelphia spoke up giving a lesson on fetal development and calling for “human rights and, specifically, the most fundamental of all rights, the right to life itself. . .”However, in the early 80’s, the bishops backed a “states’ rights amendment.” It is Law Professor Charles E. Rice who pointed out that with this position as it stands, it allows some Catholics to “interpret, or use as a pretext, the bishops’ consignment of abortion to the evaluation and ‘discretion’ of state legislators as an invitation to them, as voters, to make that same political evaluation, with abortion as one issue on a par with others.”And that’s where we are now. How to get back? The bishops must insist on the absolute right to life for the unborn members of our society. Their voices must reverberate down to the parish priests, who have done very little for this cause, and the parishioners who need to hear the truth and feel an urgency for this mission that is given to us by God for this time in the history of the world.

  • thebink

    Dr. Bernard Nathalson is getting to the end of his life and may be starting to worry that there is a God after all. I, unlike Catholics and Bernard, do not believe that I can live my life however I choose and at the last moment run to the nearest confessional for forgiveness. I also believe that Catholics that voted for Obama did so for their wallets as opposed to their faith. I call them hypocrites.

  • lucy2008

    Dr. Blazek certainly has a right to his opinion. However, we are not a theocracy. We are a democratic republic with a constitution that separates government and religion while providing each individual the right to practice any religion. I’ve been a developmental biology and human genome scientist for 25 years. Science does not support a religious doctrine or soul. It doesn’t have anything to do with religious faith. Mr. Blazek is right that a new fertilized egg is life, but so is an unfertilized egg. A new conceived cell is a recombination of it’s parents DNA. It is a blueprint and begins to gather the soup ingredients and develops according to a recipe. It is human DNA no doubt, but it isn’t a person yet. This mass of wiggly cells has the blueprint and “potential” to be a grand human being with political rights. However, what science can only say is that these are simply cells along a development path. Parts of the recipe along its pathway to make the final complex mindful being. So the point is not everyone believes as the catholic church doctrine or that espoused by the elite. If I had a choice to save the life of my affectionate lab versus my fertilized egg, I’d give up my egg without a whimper. It surely is a different viewpoint and religious view. I am as religious and moral but with a different viewpoint about the natural world, science and reason, and mans place amongst nature.Supporting wide and cheap availability of contraceptives and effective family planning healthcare will lower unwanted pregancies and make abortion very rare but safe. What a wonderful world that will be.

  • lucy2008

    Dr. Blazek certainly has a right to his opinion. However, we are not a theocracy. We are a democratic republic with a constitution that separates government and religion while providing each individual the right to practice any religion. I’ve been a developmental biology and human genome scientist for 25 years. Science does not support a religious doctrine or soul. It doesn’t have anything to do with religious faith. Mr. Blazek is right that a new fertilized egg is life, but so is an unfertilized egg. A new conceived cell is a recombination of it’s parents DNA. It is a blueprint and begins to gather the soup ingredients and develops according to a recipe. It is human DNA no doubt, but it isn’t a person yet. This mass of wiggly cells has the blueprint and “potential” to be a grand human being with political rights. However, what science can only say is that these are simply cells along a development path. Parts of the recipe along its pathway to make the final complex mindful being. So the point is not everyone believes as the catholic church doctrine or that espoused by the elite. If I had a choice to save the life of my affectionate lab versus my fertilized egg, I’d give up my egg without a whimper. It surely is a different viewpoint and religious view. I am as religious and moral but with a different viewpoint about the natural world, science and reason, and mans place amongst nature.Supporting wide and cheap availability of contraceptives and effective family planning healthcare will lower unwanted pregancies and make abortion very rare but safe. What a wonderful world that will be.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Lucy2008 wrote:”I’ve been a developmental biology and human genome scientist for 25 years. Science does not support a religious doctrine or soul. It doesn’t have anything to do with religious faith. Mr. Blazek is right that a new fertilized egg is life, but so is an unfertilized egg.”Lucy2008, maybe you have noticed that Dr Blazek is a medical doctor and can us thus claim scientific credibility? If as a development biologist and human genome scientist for 25, you are unable to tell the difference between an unfertilized egg and a fertilized one, you are going to have to try really hard to convince a medical doctor about your scientific credentials.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    And btw, Lucy2008, Hippocrates, the Greek pagan father of Western medicine, was not a priest. Read the Hippocratic Oath sometime. It predates Christianity by nearly 400 years.