cmotherofpirl Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 From the always excellent site Creative Minority: 'http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2009/02/bishop-puts-senator-on-notice.html Bob Casey of Pennsylvania ran for Senator as a pro-life candidate; a fact which clearly made his defeat of pro-life Senator Rick Santorum more likely. But recently, many believe Senator Bob Casey has not lived up to the rhetoric of candidate Casey when it comes to being pro-life. Casey failed to vote against President Obama's change of the Mexico City policy which allowed the United States to fund groups that perform abortions overseas. Casey, in fact, went so far as to argue that giving the groups money was somewhat pro-life in that it could reduce the number of abortions by promoting contraception. Bishop Martino obviously did not agree, according to the diocesan website. In a letter earlier this month Bishop Martino condemned Sen. Casey’s vote and urged him to reverse it. “Your vote against the Mexico City Policy will mean the deaths of thousands of unborn children. This is an offense against life and a denial of our Catholic teaching on the dignity of every human being. This action is worthy of condemnation by all moral men and women...Your failure to reverse this vote will regrettably mean that you persist formally in cooperating with the evil brought about by this hideous and unnecessary policy,” says the Bishop. And now Bishop Martino has sent a second letter to Senator Casey urging him to reverse his vote; this time with even stronger language: Dear Senator Casey, It is a matter of deep concern that your recent vote against the Mexico City Policy is continually misrepresented by your staff as a pro-life vote intended to promote “contraception and other family planning that avoid unintended pregnancies” (Times-Tribune, February 6, 2009). The Mexico City Policy is, first and foremost, about abortion, not about family planning. First put in place in 1984, the policy required all non-governmental organizations that receive federal funding to refrain from performing or promoting abortion services abroad. The policy required such organizations to agree as a condition for receiving U.S. foreign aid dollars that they would “neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.” The policy included exceptions for abortions done in cases of rape, incest or life-threatening conditions. Furthermore, the Mexico City Policy did not take funds away from family planning; its effect is quite the opposite. Tom McCluskey of the Family Research Council reported the following: “. . .The Mexico City policy halts U.S. family planning funds from going to foreign . . . [NGOs] that perform abortions or ‘actively promote’ abortion as a method of family planning in other countries. . . The effect of President Obama rescinding the Mexico City Policy is that now millions ($461 million in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008) of dollars are taken away from family planning groups that do not promote abortions, and delivered into the hands of organizations that are the most militant in promoting abortion as a population-control method—especially in countries that find abortion objectionable on moral grounds” (my emphasis). Contrary to the claims of your staff, the absence of “Mexico City” regulations insures (1) that money is taken away from family planning, (2) that abortion is promoted as a method of family planning, and (3) that countries that have moral and cultural objections to abortion are encouraged to abandon their policies against it. Finally, it is never permissible to use immoral means such as artificial contraception to achieve a good end, namely, the reduction of unplanned pregnancies. In fact, the mistaken view that artificial contraception may be used to regulate population growth and the size of families has led to countless evils in America and abroad, including the attitude that having and raising children is a burden to be avoided. This attitude has contributed mightily to the acceptability of abortion as a means of contraception both at home and abroad. My letter of January 30 urging you to rescind your vote on the Mexico City Policy was in no way mistaken regarding the nature and the effect of President Obama’s order to rescind America’s long-standing policy to avoid using U.S. tax dollars to support organizations that promote abortion abroad. It is imperative that this fact be made known to the public. It is also imperative that there be utter clarity when it comes to the teaching of the Church on matters that pertain to the taking of innocent life and the special responsibilities that fall to you, Senator, as a lawmaker to oppose abortion and other clear evils. In closing, I refer you to the words of Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, to President Obama urging him to retain the Mexico City Policy. The Mexico City Policy . . . has wrongly been attacked as a restriction on foreign aid for family planning. In fact, it has not reduced such aid at all, but has ensured that family planning funds are not diverted to organizations dedicated to performing and promoting abortions instead of reducing them. Once the clear line between family planning and abortion is erased, the idea of using family planning to reduce abortions becomes meaningless, and abortion tends to replace contraception as the means for reducing family size. A shift toward promoting abortion in developing nations would also increase distrust of the United States in these nations, whose values and culture often reject abortion, at a time when we need their trust and respect (January 23, 2009). Sincerely, Most Reverend Joseph F. Martino, D.D., Hist. E.D. Bishop of Scranton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Ahh the joys of electing pro-life democrats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didymus Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote name='notardillacid' post='1795203' date='Mar 2 2009, 01:39 PM']Ahh the joys of electing pro-life democrats[/quote] rock on dude.. way to blanket an entire sect within the Democratic Party.. Maybe now we can discuss how all Catholic priests are pedophiles, or perhaps that it's highly unlikely to hit a home run without taking steroids.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didymus Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 and God bless Bishop Martino for holding true and writing again.. Hopefully Casey will at least stop calling himself pro-life and Catholic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted March 2, 2009 Author Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote name='Didymus' post='1795300' date='Mar 2 2009, 04:11 PM']and God bless Bishop Martino for holding true and writing again.. Hopefully Casey will at least stop calling himself pro-life and Catholic.[/quote] Him? Not a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thessalonian Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Bob Casey is a turncoat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 If someone is taking wagers, I'm betting on the bishop to win this battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote name='Didymus' post='1795296' date='Mar 2 2009, 03:08 PM']rock on dude.. way to blanket an entire sect within the Democratic Party.. Maybe now we can discuss how all Catholic priests are pedophiles, or perhaps that it's highly unlikely to hit a home run without taking steroids..[/quote] I'm all over it bro. The pro-life democrats lost all respectability in my eyes with his election and subsequent betrayal. We're talkin about a senate seat. The real deal. Already a pro-lifer in, the democrats played pro-lifers like a fiddle to get their man into office. The old bait and switch as clear as day. They've done it once, and I'm sure they'll do it again. Politicians clearly have no honor. Similarly, since Bush did an about turn on fiscal responsibility and nation building, I doubt I'll ever vote a republican for president. I have low tolerance for people that are full of **** Fool me once, shame on me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 "Pro-life" Democrats have proven time and again that they are not really pro-life. The Democratic Party is the party of hedonism and atheism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I'm a pro-life Democrat, and I am not an atheist or a hedonist, but I'm willing to learn the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didymus Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 [quote name='notardillacid' post='1795375' date='Mar 2 2009, 05:39 PM']I'm all over it bro. The pro-life democrats lost all respectability in my eyes with his election and subsequent betrayal. We're talkin about a senate seat. The real deal. Already a pro-lifer in, the democrats played pro-lifers like a fiddle to get their man into office. The old bait and switch as clear as day. They've done it once, and I'm sure they'll do it again. Politicians clearly have no honor. Similarly, since Bush did an about turn on fiscal responsibility and nation building, I doubt I'll ever vote a republican for president. I have low tolerance for people that are full of **** Fool me once, shame on me...[/quote] Thank you for expounding.. I can definitely see your point, but I myself would be leaning more towards believing that the movement (Dems for Life) was perhaps used by other Dems to exploit the PL voting body, not so much that every dem who claims to be pro-life is lying and trying to use us. There are some good Catholics in local politics in my state who are dems and who belong to local affiliates of Dems for Life. I don't agree with a lot of what they stand for in other issues, but they are consistent in opposing their party on abortion and other social issues that concern the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlesister Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 The Casey's were our neighbors once. After his father's splendid example, Bob's reversal of position is a double disappointment for everyone who believed him.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1796167' date='Mar 3 2009, 08:41 AM']I'm a pro-life Democrat, and I am not an atheist or a hedonist, but I'm willing to learn the latter.[/quote] You're also not in Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' post='1796783' date='Mar 3 2009, 08:22 PM']You're also not in Congress.[/quote] I can truthfully say that I hope to never get elected there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Which would be kind of difficult anyway seeing as your place of residence is not in the United States... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now