Nancy Pelosi: Lousy Catholic, Lousy Congresswoman

The Archbishop of San Francisco takes House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to task, and says that as a member of the Catholic Faith, she should start practicing what the church preaches.

I’m not a practicing Catholic, (although I am far from being an atheist) and I have to admit that what Archbishop Niederauer says are tenets anyone would do well to follow.

Ms. Pelosi however, like most liberals, doesn’t let the rules of her religion influence her actions.
After all, there are times when she’s right, and God is wrong.
Such as the issue of abortion.

In a recent interview with Eleanor Clift in Newsweek magazine (Dec. 21, 2009), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked about her disagreements with the United States Catholic bishops concerning Church teaching. Speaker Pelosi replied, in part: “I practically mourn this difference of opinion because I feel what I was raised to believe is consistent with what I profess, and that we are all endowed with a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And that women should have the opportunity to exercise their free will.”

Embodied in that statement are some fundamental misconceptions about Catholic teaching on human freedom. These misconceptions are widespread both within the Catholic community and beyond. For this reason I believe it is important for me as Archbishop of San Francisco to make clear what the Catholic Church teaches about free will, conscience, and moral choice.

Catholic teaching on free will recognizes that God has given men and women the capacity to choose good or evil in their lives. The bishops at the Second Vatican Council declared that the human person, endowed with freedom, is “an outstanding manifestation of the divine image.” (Gaudium et Spes, No. 17) As the parable of the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky’s novel, The Brothers Karamazov, makes so beautifully clear, God did not want humanity to be mere automatons, but to have the dignity of freedom, even recognizing that with that freedom comes the cost of many evil choices.

Read the rest of this entry

Abortions? Who Needs Abortions, We Have Obama’s Science Czar!

The battle between the pro-life and pro-choice forces has been raging for decades.

Thanks to Barack Obama, that battle is about to enter a new phase.

With the appointment of John Holdren as Science Czar, the President has added a entirely new dimension to the question of a woman’s right to choose vs. the rights of the unborn.

If Holdren has his way, these decisions will no longer be made by pregnant women, instead they will be made by the government.

Take a look at some direct quotes from a book Holdren co-authored entitled Ecoscience:

Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.

In other words, if the government decides that it is in the best interests of society that you have an abortion, then you will, by law, be requires to have one.

Howver, not if you can’t become pregnant:

Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control.
Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems.
No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development.
To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

Once again, a member of the Obama administration proves to be a visionary.
Who needs to worry about abortions if a woman is unable to become pregnant in the first place?
As far as pets, if there are too many cats, we’ll let the SPCA worry about that.

Of course, some of you radicals may object to such drastic measures.
If that is the case, Holdren proposed an alternative plan:

A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. 
The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.

See how simple that is?
If you want to have a baby, all you have to do is get permission from the government!

Of course, as with everything the government does, there will be some conditions:

If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection.

So if there is something about you or your family background that some government bureacrat deems undesirable, maybe you can get a voucher for a free puppy.
Rememer, Holdren doesn’t want to sterilize pets, only people.

Let’s say that, despite Holdrens’ apparent wishes, you do manage to procreate.
What happens when your offspring reaches school age?

Don’t worry about it.
The Obama administration has you covered.
Keep in mind that he has appointed Kevin Jennings as “Safe Schools” Czar, a top position in our nation’s educational system.

Again, some of you real radicals may have a problem with a school’s cirriculum being overseen by a man who ignored the homosexual statutory rape of a fifteen year old boy.

Just quit your complaining, after all, the government gave you permission to have a child, what more do you want?