Bush Is Not Pro-life...

[Kilroy the Ninja]

[quote name='MorphRC' date='Aug 8 2004, 10:28 AM'] 'Fanrenheit 9/11' - Cinema. [u]Video Clip Proof[/u]
[/quote]
Dude to even try to quote that garbage in this argument is riduculous. This particular "documentary" has more basis in fantasy than fact.

[Matty_boy]

Anna, I love you, you rock my world! Great post.

MorphRC, you're impossible. You deny the credibility of the 9/11 Commission Reports, the British MI6, and Russian Intelligence on WMDs in Iraq but you use Fahrenheit 9/11 as a credible source of information. Michael Moore even said that the movie was just his OPINION. Besides, there were WMDs in Iraq, but one Mr. Clinton didn't have the guts to do anything more than send the U.N. inspection team to ask Mr. Hussein if they could inspect his facilities. This lasted 8 years. If you were Saddam with WMDs and you had people looking for WMDs on your soil, would you keep them in your country or move them out so they wouldn't be found? Use your head and think instead of listening to propaganda from Michael Moore and his ilk.

[qfnol31]

Morph,

What happened to all the WMDs that were in Iraq during the Gulf War?

[IcePrincessKRS]

They disintegrated? Saddam ate them? Hid them under his bed?

[MichaelFilo]

Morph is expressing serious anti-American feelings. Which I don't agree with, completely.

What happened to the WMD's? Umm, I thought we were supposed to be finding them. However, we can't. The WMDs are like.. not there. Who knows what happened? Sold them, gave them away, who knows. You don't go attacking a country with the only "proof" is a possibility of something bad there.

It maybe good to note, there is no Al Qeada link. From the very strat it wouldn't work out, Saddam = Iraqi, Bin Laden = Saudi... I don't think they'd live in the same city together if possible.

Something some people don't mention when referring to the "tyrant" is the fact that he actually PROTECTED Christians. Indeed, during the Gulf War, thats the only houses he'd hide in. No new muslim ruler will do that. No one will stop the anti-Non-mulsim hatred. We saw that when the churches blew up. OF course, all this goes unsaid.

But morph, honestly if anyone should be angry about this war and/or Bush, it'd be me. For some reason, you feel more strongly about it than I do. Just chill. However, American imperalism is an undertone that no one realizes exists. It's become natural.

God bless,

Mikey

[Good Friday]

Bush is not pro-life and no Catholic should vote for him.

- There is the very real possibility that [url="http://www.google.com/search?q=Bush+abortion+Robin+Lowman&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&newwindow=1&safe=active&start=0&sa=N"]he helped an old girlfriend procure an abortion[/url] in 1971, before it was even legal.

- President Bush supports abortion exceptions, including exceptions for rape, incest and risk to the life of the mother (Source: "Bush Abortion Comments Spark Debate", [url="http://www.conservativenews.org/InDepth/archive/199903/IND19990322e.html"]Pro-Life Infonet[/url], 3/22/99).

- Alan Keyes pointed out that these exceptions disqualify him from being pro-life at all (Source: Alan Keyes on Greenspan At Large (CNN), 8/9/01, [url="http://www.renewamerica.tv/archives/media/interviews/01_08_09stemcell.htm"]Renew America Archives[/url]).

- President Bush didn't think that [i]Roe v. Wade[/i] should be overturned (Source: "Bush: USA Isn't Ready for Total Abortion Ban", [url="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-10-28-bush-abortion_x.htm"]USA Today[/url], 10/28/03).

- President Bush aready has the power to stop abortion in this country, but refuses to do so (Source: [url="http://www.wherethetruthhurts.org/tractsbooksread.php?w=26&p=1"]"The Line in the Sand: Siding with God to Abolish Abortion"[/url]).

- On the campaign trail, commenting on abortion, President Bush said "good people can disagree on that issue (Source: "Bush, McCain Step Around Abortion", The Associated Press, 1/27/00)."

- President Bush appointed pro-abortion justices to the Texas Supreme Court, yet this is the man that we're supposed to believe is going to appoint pro-life justices to the United States Supreme Court -- just as we were supposed to believe President Reagan would when, in fact, he appointed pro-abortion Sandra Day O'Connor (Source: The New York Times, 7/9/00).

- In a major shift from the Mexico city policy, President Bush now allows the United States to fund AIDS relief groups who also promote "family planning" (in other words, contraception, including abortifacients) and abortion, in Africa and the Caribbean (Source: "Bush Eases Ban on AIDS Money to Pro-Abortion Groups Abroad", [url="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/15/"]New York Times[/url], 2/15/03).

- The American Life League agrees that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban will not save a single unborn life. Why? Because it does not ban other late-term abortion methods, like Dilation and Extraction. This means that instead of being instantly killed by a stab to the head, the unborn baby will be slowly and painfully ripped limb from limb. This is what the Republican Congress and President Bush have done for the unborn. Shouldn't we be grateful? (Source: [url="http://www.ohiocp.org/pbabanfarce.php"]"The Partial Birth Abortion Ban is a Farce"[/url], Ohio Constitution Party Website).

- Planned Parenthood, one of the leading abortion providers in this country and throughout the world, still receives federal funding under the Bush Administration (Source: [url="http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=122-12172003"]"Government Funding and Abortion Income Help Planned Parenthood Make a Killing, According to Organization's Annual Report"[/url], U.S. Newswire).

- President Bush believed that states should be able to legislate gay marriages and/or gay unions, and there is no evidence that he opposes civil unions at the state level even still (Sources: [url="http://www.logcabinwa.com/archive/200312171214.shtml"]"President Bush's Interview with Diane Sawyer"[/url], Log Cabin Republicans of Washington, 12/17/03; [url="http://www.cwfa.org/articles/5010/MEDIA/family/index.htm"]"CWA Warns: Presidential Embrace of Civil Unions Undermines Pro-Family Effort to Save Marriage"[/url], Concerned Women for America, 12/17/03).

- President Bush has no qualms about appointing openly homosexual men and women to high government positions. As Governor of Texas, he appointed Martha Hill Jamison to the 164th District Court in Houston; she's active with the Houston Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus and Planned Parenthood. Very early in his presidency, President Bush appointed a pro-homosexual, pro-abortion judge to the federal bench. He has appointed two openly homosexual activists to the Office of National AIDS Policy and the U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS (Source: [url="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3114.html"]"Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush"[/url], Intellectual Conservative).

- On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual Ambassador of Romania, at the protest of the Romanian government. Furthermore, he upheld Clinton's policy of allowing a foreign aid worker's "unmarried partner" to be treated as a spouse, so this homosexual's lover accompanies him to official government functions at the taxpayers' expense (Source: [url="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3114.html"]"Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush"[/url], Intellectual Conservative).

- On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts. (See above source).

- President Bush presided over the appointment of a homosexual to oversee the choice of civilian personnel at the Pentagon (so much for Don't Ask, Don't Tell?). (Again, see above source).

- Johnsonville brat Cheney promotes same-sex unions, probably because his daughter is a lesbian (Source: [url="http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/miller/miller27.html"]"Freedom Means Freedom for Everybody"[/url], Independent Gay Forum, 10/19/00).

- For more information on President Bush's extensive support for abortion and especially homosexuality, please visit: [url="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3114.html"]Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush[/url].

But that's not all President Bush has done that should be scandalous to Catholics:

- He bowed down to a pagan Shinto shrine in Japan, scandalizing Korean and Japanese Christians (Source: [url="http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20020219a4.htm"]"Denouncing the President Bush's Shinto Shrine Worship"[/url], Christian Council of Korea, Christian Ethics Movement of Korea).

- He approved federal financing of embryonic stem cell research (more on that in a bit). (Source: [url="http://www.rnclife.org/reports/2001/sept-oct01/sept-oct01.shtml"]"Bush Policy Forces Taxpayers Into Cooperation With Killing Embryos"[/url], Republican National Coalition for Life Report, Sept/Oct 2001).

- President Bush publicly condemned Chief Justice Roy Moore's support for the Ten Commandments and his stand for God (Source: [url="http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,216568-1-9,00.html"]"Disputed U.S. Monument Removed"[/url], One News, 8/28/03), and Karl Rove spearheaded the attack against Moore (Source: Chuck Baldwin, [url="http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin142.htm"]"Is President Bush Really One of Us?"[/url], 10/25/03). While Moore was about to lose his job because of Bill Pryor, President Bush was in California campaigning for pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Now, back to that embryonic stem cell research and the American Life League.

- According to the American Life League: "But, President Bush decided to use stem cell lines already in existence; the human beings have already been killed. Such an action condones the act of direct killing and creates a situation whereby the federal government becomes complicit in the act that originally took the life of each of those hundreds of embryonic human beings who were killed in order to develop the stem cell lines referred to by President Bush . . . Will human embryonic stem cell research scientists now feel free to clone and kill? Did President Bush know this? Does he care?" (Source: [url="http://www.all.org/issues/scbasic.htm"]"Basic Facts About Embryonic Stem Cells"[/url], American Life League).

- The American Life League denounces Bush's position on embryonic stem cell research [url="http://www.all.org/issues/scanalyz.htm"]here[/url] and [url="http://www.all.org/issues/broken.htm"]here[/url]. This was also condemned by:

[url="http://www.nccbuscc.org/comm/archives/2001/01-142.htm"]United States Conference of Catholic Bishops[/url]
[url="http://cwfa.org/library/life/2001-08-10_stem-cell.shtml"]Concerned Women for America[/url]
[url="http://www.hli.org/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/001/250chmzc.asp"]Human Life International[/url]
[url="http://www.judicialwatch.org/press_release.asp?pr_id=1481"]Judicial Watch[/url]
[url="http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/press/press/010810-responsetostemcell.html"]Operation Save America[/url]
[url="http://www.rnclife.org/faxnotes/2001/aug01/01-08-10.shtml"]Republican National Coalition for Life[/url]
Eagle Forum (No Source)
Family Research Council (No Source)
Traditional Values Coalition (No Source)
[url="http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-allen081301.shtml"]Charlotte Allen[/url]
[url="http://www.covenantnews.com/baldwin010817.htm"]Chuck Baldwin[/url]
[url="http://declarationfoundation.org/news.asp?docID=1967"]Alan Keyes[/url]
[url="http://www.all.org/issues/scpickup.htm"]Mark Pickup[/url]
[url="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20010813.shtml"]Cal Thomas[/url]

So who does Judie Brown say we should vote for?

She says: "An 'exceptions' politician is educable. Most likely, these people haven't thought it through when it comes to sanctioning abortions for supposedly 'compassionate' reasons. Would it be immoral to vote for such a person? The Church has only spoken about those who are 100% pro-abortion. Regarding the 'exceptions' candidate, this would be a matter of conscience. I personally will not vote for such a person." ([url="http://www.all.org/about/forum522.htm"]Source[/url])

On the topic of President Bush, specifically, Judie Brown says:

". . . what I do know is that there is no such thing as a politically acceptable or politically realistic abortion - every abortion results in the death of an innocent human being.

"Perhaps if we of the pro-life movement expected our political leaders to be more faithful than pragmatic, God would bless our nation with an end to the heinous crime of abortion. But as long as we place more confidence in the 'lesser of two evils' argument than we do in the truth, the road will continue to swerve downward. It's nice to make statements about what the president has done, but let's just be honest about it if you do not mind.

"The partial birth abortion law is not a ban and in fact will not stop even one abortion; it simply will perhaps get abortionists to do more of a different type of procedure.

"Abstinence education programs are funded for a lot of different groups including Planned Parenthood.

"The Unborn Victims of Violence Act does admit, in the language, that Roe v. Wade is a legitimate decision and if the mother chooses to have her baby killed by abortion, that is acceptable because abortion is legal. Thus the bill legitimizes Roe v. Wade.

"Bush has made few appointments to lower courts of judges who are definitively pro-life." ([url="http://"http://www.all.org/about/forum508.htm"]Source[/url])

So who does Judie Brown think we should vote for? Well, she doesn't say for sure, because to do so would be to risk the non-profit status of the American Life League, but she is a Board Advisor for the [url="http://www.prolifepac.com/"]100% Pro-Life PAC[/url], which endorses Michael A. Peroutka for President of the United States. Mr. Peroutka, unlike President Bush, is 100% pro-life -- in fact, he has promised to use his presidential power to overturn Roe v. Wade his first day in office, and to end federal funding for any embryonic stem cell research. Incidentally, Mr. Peroutka and his Constitution Party also oppose abortifacient contraceptives, they unequivocally oppose same-sex marriages or unions, and they oppose Bush's unjust war in Iraq and all wars that aren't formally declared by Congress. Thus, it is incumbent upon every Catholic to, at the very least, prayerfully consider voting for Mr. Peroutka instead of President Bush, who is not pro-life.

Before everyone goes off on how wrong Judie Brown is, I'd like everyone to pause and remember:

- Ms. Brown founded the American Life League in 1979, only six years after Roe v. Wade, and she has been an active pro-life activist ever since.

- She is recognized as an expert on abortion, contraception, assisted suicide, euthanasia, cloning and other reproductive technologies.

- She has appeared on 20/20, 60 Minutes, Mother Angelica Live, The O'Reilly Factor, Good Morning America, Today, Oprah and Larry King Live, and she has written editorial pieces for many publications, including The Washington Post and USA Today.

- She is a Corresponding Member/Advisor of the Pontifical Academy for Life, now serving her second five-year term.

- She is on the EWTN Experts Forum.

- She has received many awards, including: Knights of Columbus Service Award, 1976; Protector Award, Pro-Life Action League, 1982; Most Admired Conservative Woman not in Congress, 1983 and 1984; International Human Life Award, Human Life International, 1990; Elected #49 in the Top 100 Catholics of Century by Daily Catholic; Disciple for Christ Award, Rachel's Vineyard, 2002.

Every Catholic simply [b]must[/b] consider what Mrs. Brown has to say about this.

[littleflower+JMJ]

[url="http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/votingstatement.htm"]When the Choices aren't so clear, the rule is still limit the evil![/url]

-- Fr. Frank Pavone, Director, Priests for Life

Preparing for elections involves converting people to the position that abortion is the single most important problem of all, and that if we don't elect people who will defend the right to life, our work to secure any other rights is in peril.

But it also involves helping the converted to deal with imperfection, uncertainty, and the limitations of politics. And that can be a harder task than winning converts in the first place.

Once we understand that abortion is the most critical problem, then we know that we cannot elect a pro-abortion person simply because he or she seems to have a better idea about housing or education (or any other issue).

But on the specific point of abortion, if the only choices we have are "bad" and "worse," what do we do?

[u]Answer: We vote for the person who will do the least damage.[/u]

The fact that whoever gets in will be a problem is not our fault. We really aren't free in such a case to choose the kind of candidate we want. So when we're really not free, we can't be doing wrong. Where we are free is to choose the person who will do less damage to life, who will allow fewer abortions, who will protect more children than the opponent.

To drive home this point, we at Priests for Life have written the following statement, which also reflects the thinking of numerous leaders in the Church. It is our hope that those who are inclined not to vote at all may think again, and use their vote to help accomplish the best possible progress at the moment.

[i]Statement on Voting[/i]

November 5 provides an opportunity for our fellow Catholics and all citizens of good will to use their vote to advance the cause of life, especially the most vulnerable in our society - preborn children in danger of abortion.

As Election Day draws near we are aware that some people are in a moral quandary and think that no candidate is worthy of their support. Some are even inclined not to vote at all. In our role as teachers of morality, we would like to clarify that while we can never choose between two evils, [b]we can choose to do good to limit an evil[/b]. When one's choice of candidates who have a viable opportunity to win is limited to two unfavorable candidates, to choose to limit evil by voting for the better of the two is to choose a good. To vote for an imperfect candidate is not to endorse that candidate’s position on every issue. Nor is it to compromise our ultimate goal which is the protection of all pre-born children.

We urge all citizens to fully participate in the political process and to use their vote to defend the most vulnerable in our society. By doing so we will move closer to that day when each and every human being is welcomed in life and protected in law.

Fr. Frank Pavone

Founding Director, Priests for Life

Fr. Peter West

Associate, Priests for Life

Fr. Denis G. Wilde, O.S.A.

Associate, Priests for Life

Fr. Walter Quinn, O.S.A.

Associate, Priests for Life

Fr. Richard John Neuhaus

President, Institute for Religion and Public Life

Editor, First Things

Dr. William E. May

Professor of Moral Theology, John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family


[b]*********************************************[/b]

continuation to my earlier posts that were from the Pope, Bishops and EWTN.

[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=17224&view=findpost&p=298704"]earlier post[/url]


pax.

[Good Friday]

So we have Fr. Pavone vs. Judie Brown, both prominent pro-life activists. I'm going with Judie Brown, you go with Fr. Pavone. But the point is that this is not a black and white area -- it's a grey area. Judie Brown is on the Pontifical Academy for Life; she's not a moron just because there's a priest somewhere who disagrees with her.

My point was that Catholics need to consider what Judie Brown has to say, not just dismiss her out of hand because they want to vote for Bush.

[littleflower+JMJ]

um i wasnt' dismissing her, i was adding on to my last post.

and if you read my quotes from my earlier post you will see that Fr. Pavon echos what i had last posted.

i got all my information from EWTN along with the Bishops and quotes from the Pope.

[url="http://www.ewtn.com/vote/index.htm"]PEEP IT HERE.[/url]


[b]especially this one. [url="http://www.ewtn.com/vote/voting_faq.htm"]http://www.ewtn.com/vote/voting_faq.htm[/url][/b]

oh yeah and this one...
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm"]http://www.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm[/url]

Fr. Pavone (as all priests are) is part of the Church (shepards) in guiding us catholics (flock) (which is why i added his letter) and im going by how the Church instructs us to use our vote in elections... and thats what all catholics are trying to do.

its not easy when it comes to politics (which is why i dont like politics)

pax.

[Anna]

All excellent reasons to vote for the 100% pro-life candidate, Good Friday! (Except the rumors. I'd rather stick with the facts, and you provided ample sources. Your dilligence is commendable!)

But you said earlier that you weren't going to vote at all. I think you should vote, and you should vote your conscience.

I'm not one who insists that you must vote for a semi-pro-life candidate simply based upon his electibility, because I do feel that every vote that goes for a 100% pro-life candidate sends a strong message also. It tell the candidates, "you could've had my vote, but you just weren't dedicated enough to my cause."

And yes, if only all Catholics would educate themselves on the life issues and vote accordingly, we WOULD abolish abortion in our land.

I'll most likely still vote for Bush.
Why?
Electibility. There are only two men with a snowball's chance of becoming the next President. Bush is the lesser of two evils.
Kerry is infinitely more outspoken and his voting record more heinous on moral issues.

Pax Christi. <><

[Good Friday]

[quote name='Anna']Electibility. There are only two men with a snowball's chance of becoming the next President. Bush is the lesser of two evils.[/quote]
Thanks, Anna, for not being one of those people who think I must vote for Bush or risk eternal damnation.

I just can't bring myself to vote for this "lesser of two evils" when he is, well, [b]so darn evil[/b]. Previously, I thought I was just not going to vote at all, but in light of what Judie Brown has to say (her and many others), I've decided to vote for Michael Peroutka.

[MorphRC]

[quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Aug 9 2004, 04:06 AM'] Dude to even try to quote that garbage in this argument is riduculous. This particular "documentary" has more basis in fantasy than fact. [/quote]
You cant fake a video clip! Nice try with the anti-moore stuff. But hes got more creditibility than Bush has had in his life.

[MorphRC]

[quote name='Matty_boy' date='Aug 9 2004, 05:11 AM'] Matts stuff. [/quote]
[quote]MorphRC, you're impossible.  You deny the credibility of the 9/11 Commission Reports, the British MI6, and Russian Intelligence on WMDs in Iraq but you use Fahrenheit 9/11 as a credible source of information.[/quote]

I never used the 9/11 Commission since I havent studied it. Two. Id trust british intelligence, when Satan bows before God Himself! Russian Intelligence, the same that hide the 200 killings a day in Chechnya? I use parts of Fan. 9/11 that cant be taken out of context or mixed around with.

[quote]Michael Moore even said that the movie was just his OPINION. [/quote]

Duh.

[quote]Besides, there were WMDs in Iraq, but one Mr. Clinton didn't have the guts to do anything more than send the U.N. inspection team to ask Mr. Hussein if they could inspect his facilities.[/quote]

Yep.

[quote]This lasted 8 years.  If you were Saddam with WMDs and you had people looking for WMDs on your soil, would you keep them in your country or move them out so they wouldn't be found?  [/quote]

Hold On. Bush said they were [b]IN[/b] Iraq! Well theres another excuse to attack another soveign nation.

[quote]Use your head and think instead of listening to propaganda from Michael Moore and his ilk.[/quote]

Read Above Quote.

[MorphRC]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:03 AM'] Morph,

What happened to all the WMDs that were in Iraq during the Gulf War? [/quote]
Dont Know. Bush could have given the UN Inspectors more time, instead of attacking a country without concrete proof.

[MorphRC]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:07 AM'] They disintegrated? Saddam ate them? Hid them under his bed? [/quote]
Or Maybe the US Took back what they sold him?