May Newsgram, Part 2, 1996

Monthly Issues

If you care to reprint or use references from this issue, the following credits and information must be attached: Children of the Rosary Publication, May Newsgram, 1996, Part 2.

LADY OF DEATH

By Katherine Sabelko

Christie Whitman (R), New Jersey's governor, stated on CNN Inside Politics Weekend with Wolfe Blitzer, April 27, that she isn't interested in being Robert Dole's running mate. She strongly supports and has worked to eliminate the pro-life plank from the Republican platform.

She was clear in her support of the veto against the partial birth abortion (PBA) ban bill. Her statement follows:

"Did President Clinton do the right thing when he vetoed the late-term abortion legislation? I would have supported that. Not that I think the technique is anything we want to see but that it's only used for cases that are extreme medical emergencies and I hate to have the government determining for a doctor what procedures they can do when there are good medical reasons to do something. It is so rarely used that that is not the issue we should be focusing on. We should be focusing on preventing unwanted pregnancies. I would have supported the veto."

Once again we hear terrible lies, lies that mostly Democrats spew out. Her immoral, despicable stand for killing babies is no better than Rep. Pastor's, Arizona's shameful Catholic who voted to keep killing babies who are truly partially born.

Whitman's pro-abortion stand has been well known for several years. Conservatives seemed to have glossed over this fact in their praise of her work as a governor. Now that her stand has taken a radical-left adjustment, it should be noted that she should not receive any future considerations as a leader in the Republican party. V

AMERICA'S FUTURE - DEATH?

What would you predict for America's future if we continue down the road of self-pleasure, selfishness and lack of discipline? Will we will suffer from a negative birth rate, with our women dying young from sexual diseases, cancers, AIDS, and by violent acts? Same-sex marriages could be the norm. All our men could be dying at a younger age, through violence, drug usage, suicide. The next generations would be brought up in foster care, and most people would be on welfare. There would be starvation, total lack of hope and no place to worship. The churches would have been closed.

Sound far-fetched? The Soviet Union, a former world power, aborted approximately 17 million babies yearly, persecuted Christians and tolerated no thought of freedom of the individual. Everyone was dependent on the state. But this great power has crumbled because they closed God out.

On a 60 Minutes program this week, the latest statistics were released concerning Russia - a nation committing suicide. Life expectancy for Russian males has gone from 65 down to 58 and expected to drop to 53 by the year 2005. Each year 800,000 is more people die than are born. Only one in four babies in Russia are born healthy. In industrially polluted areas, 40% of all babies are born with defects, mostly mental. Average consumption of vodka averages 1/2 bottle a person per day. 99% of all injuries treated at the hospitals are due to alcohol consumption. New and old diseases are on the rise. 50 % of all water is polluted. ...one in seven are drug addicts.

If we don't all begin to fight this death culture in our country, we will condemn ourselves to the same fate. We will live in a Godless society where life means nothing. The only question to ask is what is each of us doing to turn this country back to God's plan for us? - K.S.

OKLAHOMA

We have been corresponding with Joe Wilbank from Norman, Oklahoma, who is active in praying at the abortuaries. They follow similar meditations and other prayers including the Divine Mercy Chaplet.

During a telephone conversation, Joe shared his concern over the poor attendance at the prayer vigils at the mills in Norman. Needless to say, it is the echo of what our challenge seems to be in Arizona. We have the pleasure of encouraging you to join people in Oklahoma in prayer at abortion mills if you are traveling through the area.

Though this is not a Children of the Rosary group, they follow our guidelines.

The Prolife Rosary and Chaplet of Divine Mercy are prayed each Saturday morning beginning at 9:30 in front of the Abortion Surgery Center, 2453 Wilcox Drive, Norman, OK. Wilcox Drive is 2 blocks north of Lindsay, west of 24th street. From OKC: exit I-35 at Lindsay, go left to the first traffic signal (24th St.), go left 2 blocks to Wilcox Drive, go left to the end of the street.

Please join us in this prayer for an end to the horror of abortion and in particular for the women and children who enter this abortion mill. - K.S.

REPORT FROM PRESCOTT

Based on a report from John Pelican

Gloria Feldt, former director of Central and Northern Arizona of Planned Parenthood (PP), had a bad night in Prescott , Arizona. We print the following report from John Pelican from Prescott who is active in praying in front of the PP referral clinic in Prescott:

"Gloria Feldt, recently elected president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, got a taste of what it will be like to be involved in the abortion war at the national level.

"In one of her first scheduled speeches since being elected, she spoke in Prescott, Arizona and was met by a dozen avid pro-lifers.

"These courageous folk for the cause of life made their point known by asking very striking questions and clearly presenting the pro-life position in contrast to her overpopulation rhetoric. The pro-lifers stole the show.

"One of our advocates, after hearing the "two is the limit" line, asked Ms. Feldt how many children she had. When she replied, "Three." He followed up by asking her if she felt 'guilty about that? '

"Well, the new president of PP was visibly shaken by all of the truth being put in front of her and she felt obligated to cut her presentation short!

"Thanks to the brave pro-lifers who showed up to debate her pro-abortion propaganda! Gloria Feldt can be shaken! Let's do it as she travels around the country for Planned parenthood! "

There is a successful method to challenge these pro-death people when they have advertised free presentations in your area. As in this situation, pro-lifers should have as many friends as possible attend the talk. Everyone should have several questions ready to ask the pro-death speaker.

It is advised that everyone walk into the room separately so the group will not be identified and sit in different areas of the room, close as possible to the front.

It is suggested that when asking a question, be sure the pro-life message is inserted, because the speaker might try to twist an answer. By stating the truth as your question is asked, the person is pushed into a corner.

An example would be, "Ms. Feldt, though you believe that teens are too young to have children, did you not have three children before you were twenty?"

Keep your eyes open for these propaganda-machine meetings and get your friends to attend with you. You will not only discourage the speaker, but you will also be able to change the minds of the people who have been brainwashed by PP, the death machine. K.S.

TRUTH IN PRINT - THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

By Katherine Sabelko

On May 23, Mr. Clinton expressed his disdain for Mr. Robert Dole because he felt Dole was attempting to take the moral high ground. Dole criticized Clinton for vetoing the legislation on partial-birth abortion procedure. We did not hear Clinton criticize a major business journal though, which was much harsher to the ex-governor of Arkansas. We have been treated to some honest and direct review of the abortion issue by way of The Wall Street Journal, one the nation's most respected business publications.

In the April 25, 1996 lead editorial, Who Are The Extremists? in Review & Outlook, we gratefully quote some straight thinking. The Wall Street Journal editorial begins the opening salvo in the first sentences of the first paragraph: "With capital punishment back in vogue, we ought to devise a modern method of execution for particularly fiendish criminals -- the Unibomber if convicted of the diabolical acts of which he's suspected, for example. We have a modest proposal: Why not stick a catheter in his brain and suck it out until his skull collapses?"

In the second paragraph, The Wall Street Journal editorial swiftly explains the previous statement: "We jest, of course. No one would think of doing this to another human being, even the Unibomber. But the President of the United States stands up foursquare for doing it to babies still in the womb but nearing birth, vetoing Congress's attempt to ban this procedure in late-term abortions."

When we find that the secular press is this aggressive in their criticism of the now-leader of the most powerful country in the world, we more fully understand the condemnation from the Vatican and the published official statement from the Holy See. Anyone, who has any sliver of humanity still running through their bones, would be aghast at the partial-birth abortion procedure. Yet as we know, so-called Catholics, like Rep. Pastor and Sen. 'Teddy' Kennedy, voted for this hideous death sentence to continue. Their vote should result is an immediate public excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church.

"Yet if we do not share the sure faith
of the antiabortionists, we surely
respect them for it."

Pro-lifers should be heartened by the statement made in the Wall Street Journal editorial, Who Are the Extremists?, when they stated: "These columns have never been part of the pro-life movement; our own view is that all ultimate mysteries escape the pretense of science and become the ken of faith. Yet if we do not share the sure faith of the antiabortionists, we surely respect them for it. Our sympathies are certainly with them rather than those who say that a woman has a "right" to kill the product of her womb even if it would otherwise be viable."

We strongly recommend that you secure a copy of this editorial from a friend or a copy from your local library. Keep it handy for the next pro-abortion individual that you encounter, whether minister, priest, or civil employee who states that there are many issues to consider or who stumble over the escape clause, "the seamless garment."

Be sure to take some time to express your thanks to the Wall Street Journal for their stand for life!

MORE HONEST TALK - FROM STEVE FORBES

The business world has not ignored Clinton's veto of death. In Forbs magazine, June 3, Steve Forbes, former candidate for the Republican nomination for the office of the Presidency of the United States, tackles the issue.

In his column, under Fact and Comment, Steve Forbes, editor in chief stated: "The bill allows the procedure if the mother's life is at risk. (But that still begs the question: Hasn't the birth, for all intents and purposes, already taken place? The only difference is that the baby is dead, not alive.)

No wonder many pro-choicers supported the ban. And the catholic church hierarchy, from the pope on down, has vigorously comdemned the veto, and even has publically condemned the President by name.

The White House cynically calculated that a veto would appease hard-core feminists and not provoke much reaction elsewhere. Given the relative lack of media coverage of this hideous decision, however, the President's political operatives may have been right.

Still, it's stomach-churning, even in an election year, to see the President of the United States so devoid of any genuine moral sense and fiber."

Forbes, with this statement was too gentle, considering the brutal death that thousands of children suffer because of the veto. -K.S

DISAGREEMENT IS NOT AN OPTION

By Katherine Sabelko

Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, would not answer questions from George Will on the ABC news show, This Week, May 5 when he asked why babies could not be delivered by Caesarea section instead of killing them through partial-birth abortion.

When then challenged by Cokie Roberts, who said, "You have described yourself as a serious Catholic. You and I have met at many a Mass. What is your reaction when the Catholic United States Conference of Bishops state that this (PBA) is infanticide or a step toward infanticide and the Pope says it brings down the morals of this society?"

Shalala responded: "I have enormous respect for Cardinal Law and of course for my own church but on this issue, I respectfully disagree."

Sorry, Donna, but you are in BIG spiritual trouble! - K.S.

WE MISSED YOU

Though pro-lifers declare their support of the pro-life movement, only a small percentage are present at the mills. Excluding those people who, due to physical limitations, we have over 80,000 families in the Catholic Diocese of Phoenix. We should have hundreds of families at the scheduled sites listed on the back page...but we don't.

I cannot answer that queston. Only you can. What are the reasons for not praying at the site where babiies are being killed, especially when we've proved that prayer does save some of these precious babies?

It is hard to believe that everyone is busy from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. every Saturday morning. Could you give us one hour this coming Saturday to pray to end abortion?

PRESPECTIVE - IT IS CLEARLY A SIN TO VOTE FOR A PRO-ABORTION POLITICIAN

By Father Matthew Habiger

Can a Catholic in good conscience vote for a politician who has a clear record of supporting abortion? Or is it a sin to vote for a politician who regularly uses his public office to fund or otherwise encourage the killing of unborn children?

I take the position that it is clearly a sin to vote for such a politician. Let us examine the issue. I shall appeal to arguments based on authority, and to arguments based upon the consequences of such a vote.

Every Catholic should know that abortion is a gravely serious evil, and as such is never to be supported. In the Vatican's "Declaration of Procured Abortion" (Cardinal Seper, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1974) there is a discussion of "Morality and Law" (#19-23). "Man may never obey a law which is in itself immoral, and such is the case of a law which would admit in principle the liceity of abortion. Nor can he take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it. Moreover, he may not collaborate in its application. It is, for instance, inadmissible that doctors or nurses should find themselves obliged to cooperate closely in abortions and have to choose between the law of God and their professional situation" (22).

Abortion is not just another "issue" - it is
a matter of life and death, the great civil
rights issue of our time.

Pope John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae states "I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. ...No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself and proclaimed by the Church" (EV 62C).

"The 1917 Code of Canon Law punished abortion with excommunication. The revised canonical legislation continues this tradition when it decrees that a person who actually procures an abortion incurs automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication' (Canon 1398). The excommunication affects all those who commit this crime with knowledge of the penalty attached and thus includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would not have been committed (Canon 1329).

"By this sanction the Church makes clear that abortion is a most serious and dangerous crime, thereby encouraging those who commit it to seek without delay the path of conversion. In the Church the purpose of the penalty of excommunication is to make an individual fully aware of the gravity of a certain sin and then to foster genuine conversion and repentance" (EV 62B).

The argument can be made that voting is a very remote form of cooperation in abortion. But is it all that remote? The legislator who votes for abortion is clearly a formal accomplice, giving formal cooperation with abortion. He shares both in the intention of the act, and in supplying material support for the act. If I vote for such a candidate, knowing full well that he will help make available public monies for abortion, or continue its decriminalization, then I am aiding him.

It is a hard fact that when funding dries up for budgets of abortuaries, the abortion provider lays off staff, making fewer abortions possible. Unlike the pro-life movement, the abortion industry is not staffed with volunteers, who are disinterested and stand to gain no commercial advantage. If budgets are cut, the staff is reduced. If the abortuary is unprofitable, it closes its doors.

It is not sufficient to think that, since candidate X takes the right position on other issues such as the economy, foreign relations, defense, etc., but only goes wrong on abortion, one in good conscience vote for him. Abortion deals with the first and most basic human right, without which there is nothing left to talk about.

Is this too stringent a way of thinking? Is it not nuanced enough, or does it do injustice to the complexities of a pluralistic society? Consider this question in light of another issue. Would voters be understanding and nuanced in their toleration of a known racist? Or would that defect of character in the candidate be sufficient reason for everyone to consider him unfit for public office? Why should we understand intolerance in the case of racism, but not in the case of murdering unborn babies? Abortion is not just another "issue" - it is a matter of life or death, the great civil rights issue of our time.

In his homily delivered at the National Shrine on 21 January, Barnard Cardinal Law said: "We who are here are challenged by the words of the Holy Father who calls us to be aware that we are facing an enormous and dramatic clash between good and evil, death and life, the culture of death and the culture of life. We find ourselves not only faced with, but necessarily in the midst of this conflict; we are all involved and we all share in it, with the inescapable responsibility of choosing to be unconditionally pro-life.

"That is what Catholics are called to: to be unconditionally pro-life. There is no ambiguity in the words of Peter's successor. To be Catholic is to be unconditionally pro-life. To support abortion, to advocate the right to choose an abortion can in no way be considered a Catholic option. ...

"All too many of us, however, have hidden the Gospel of Life under the bushel basket of political expediency. How scandalous it is to see the evidence of Catholic votes supporting those who deny the Gospel of Life. It is easy to criticize Catholic elected representatives who have rejected life. Do we not need to be even more concerned with the far greater number of Catholic voters who fail to challenge these politicians?

"Our task within the household of faith is clear and daunting, my brothers and sisters. It must be made abundantly clear in pulpits, in classrooms, in the lecture halls of our colleges and universities, in the Catholic press, in the way we vote, that to be Catholic is to be unconditionally pro-life.

It is a scandal that prominent Catholic politicians vote for bills which fund or otherwise advance abortion. They should be named, publicly shamed and admonished so that they can cease their evil and return to God.

To vote for such a candidate is to willfully participate in that candidate's choice and deeds. It is a sin, and must be repented.

Reprinted with permission from Human Life International, Gaithersburg, MD.

Editor Note: HLI Reports is published by Human Life International. Produced monthly, it has a suggested annual donation: $25. 7845 Airpark Rd., Suite E, Gaithersburg, MD 20879. Fax (301) 869-7363

End of May Newsgram, Part 2, 1996

NewsGram, May, Part 1, 1996
Events
Newsletters and Newsgrams

E-Mail us at .

Copyright © 1996 Children of the Rosary