Excellent article by Allan C. Carlson Ph.D titled "Marriage and Procreation: On Children as the First Purpose of Marriage." He is not a Catholic yet you would not know that by the content of the article, especially with his views on contraception. [Biretta tip to Chateau de Meau]
SACRAMENTO — Two Democratic lawmakers on Thursday introduced legislation that would make California the second state in the nation to allow doctors to prescribe medication that would enable terminally ill patients to end their own lives.
The bill is modeled after Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act, which was twice approved by voters in that state, most recently in 1997. Today, U.S. Supreme Court justices were scheduled to conduct a private conference to discuss whether to review a federal appeals court decision last year that upheld the Oregon law against a challenge from former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft.
Assemblywoman Patty Berg of Eureka and Assemblyman Lloyd Levine of Van Nuys introduced the bill after holding informational hearings over the past two months to gauge public reaction to the idea. Previous bills have never made it through either house of the Legislature, and a statewide ballot initiative in 1992 was rejected by an 8 percentage point margin.
The new bill is modeled directly after the Oregon law and includes restrictions designed to ensure that only mentally sound, terminally ill individuals are able to receive a fatal prescription, which only they could administer.
Opposition to the measure is expected to be strong. [Source]
Well they are certainly covering their bases. ESCR for those at the beginning of life and assisted-suicide (what a contradictory term) for those at the end of life or for those suffering pain.
"We will be pleased to join the coalition to defeat this," said Ned Dolejsi, executive director of the California Catholic Conference.
He said his organization has already been in conversation with the California Medical Association, hospice and disabled rights groups that have teamed to fight previous proposals to legalize assisted suicide.
Dolejsi said that in addition to the conference’s moral opposition — "life is a gift from God and we cherish that gift" — it is also bad from a public policy perspective because it would inevitably put pressure on poor and uninsured people with terminal illnesses to end their lives rather than burden their families and society with additional medical costs.
"If we’re going to debate anything, let’s talk about issues of substance," Dolejsi said. "There are almost 7 million Californians who have no health insurance. Let’s talk about that moral issue."
Well he was doing well until that last line. If he is referring to government funded healthcare it would do well to remember that historically this has lead to in some cases euthanasia to restrict costs or just plain denial of healthcare for those they deem are not worth it.
Update: Ignatius Insight has an article on Oregon’s assisted suicide law. In this article it reports how HMO’s are promoting this to patients obviously as a method to cut costs. Cold hearted business first HMO’s are bad enough and can you imagine the results by moving the decision making to Washington D.C.?
Proponents in California want to use Oregon’s law as a template and of course they will end up with similar results. For example in the first year all but one person who wanted to kill themselves was actually in physical pain. The rest were all concerned about future problems where they would need other people to help them with basic care. It was lack of mobility and pain in the first couple of years that drove most of these people to request a lethal prescription from their doctor.
It looks like some UN committees are raising up again in total support of abortion. When the Bush administration had previously decided to withhold money to many U.N. groups these same groups then publicly stated that they were not advocating abortion and they worked to suppress some of their own documents that expressed fervent abortion support. Catholic World News along with C-Fam reports on an interim report in support of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals.
The 2004 interim report by the same Task Force on Gender Equality was still more explicit, stating that to achieve this goal, "At a minimum, national public health systems must provide quality family planning, safe abortion, and emergency obstetric services."
The interim report also said that "the Task Force opposes the political ideologies and religious fundamentalisms that have sought to erode women’s reproductive rights guaranteed through numerous international conventions. These forces have persuaded some national governments, including the US, to pursue three strategies: limiting or withdrawing funding from effective programs that support women’s sexual and reproductive autonomy; censoring or distorting information and research on comprehensive health interventions and issues; and reneging on previous international agreements involving sexual and reproductive health and rights. These tactics threaten to choke the progress that has been made in the last ten years to improve women’s reproductive health and may worsen the inferior reproductive health status of poor women around the world."
The Millennium Report has been endorsed by major UN agencies including UNICEF, whose outgoing head Carol Bellamy said, "We could not support it more strongly." The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) specifically referred to the report’s focus on "ensuring universal access to reproductive health" as "critical" to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. [Source]
I truly hopes the Bush administration will go back to not funding these UN commissions. It is sad how UNICEF has changed from helping to feed children to preventing children instead.
The Sydney Catholic Archbishop, Cardinal George Pell, has opened a new front in the moral debate over the sanctity of embryonic life, saying the church would renew its push for a ban on the use of leftover embryos created during fertility treatment.
Australian laws permitting the use of excess embryos created through IVF before April 2002 are up for review this year, with a sunset clause expiring in April.
However, the Sydney Archdiocese is expected to at least double its overall contribution to adult stem cell research in the hope it will offer an ethical and more promising alternative to research on human embryos.
A first grant of $50,000 was awarded in 2003 to Griffith University to research the potential of stem cells extracted from the inner lining of a patient’s own nose to treat Parkinson’s disease.
Applications for a second medical research grant of at least $50,000 were expected to be called for shortly.
Cardinal Pell said he would be prepared to involve himself in lobbying efforts, if necessary, to bring about a national ban on embryonic stem cell research.
While scientists hope stem cells – the building blocks of all types of tissue – will provide future breakthrough treatments for diseases such as diabetes and Parkinson’s, pro-lifers oppose the use of embryos because they are destroyed in the process.
"I think Christian leaders have a duty to speak out on some moral issues and this is one," Cardinal Pell said. [Source]
This is an excellent tactical approach the Cardinal has taken. To not only condemn ESCR but to help to fund adult stem-cell research. This helps more people to see the difference between the two and to keep others from framing the debate in that the Church is against science.
"If I thought it would help I would be prepared to speak. We are not in favour of producing human beings to destroy them for scientific purposes.
"Human life is not a commodity. Life is a right in itself and it has to be respected and we’ve got no right to destroy innocent life."
PIERRE, S.D. – Insurance companies in South Dakota will not be forced to cover birth control.
A bill killed unanimously by the Senate Commerce Committee would have required insurers who offer prescription drug coverage to also cover the cost of contraceptive devices and birth-control pills.
Half of unintended pregnancies end in abortion, said Kate Looby, state director of Planned Parenthood. She said SB167 would help reduce abortions in South Dakota.
"If you oppose abortion, you must support this bill," she told legislators. "This is the most important anti-abortion bill this year." [Source]
This at least is good news especially with the increased tack of pro-abortion groups wanting to ensure that every American is using contraception. That this is the most important anti-abortion bill is just a pure lie. The contraceptives they want to cover can act as abortifacients so it will not reduce the number of abortions only the number of abortions known about. A hidden chemical abortion is no abortion at all by this attitude. The other fact is that the very presence of a contraceptive attitude is what help drives those seeking an abortion. Abortion as backup contraception is what happens when one tries to disconnect sex from procreation. More contraception to prevent abortion is like throwing gasoline on a fire to put it out.
I was listening to the Laura Ingraham Show and heard an interesting exchange between her and Donna Crane a spokesman for NARAL in regards to crisis pregnancy centers and ultrasounds. I record talk radio shows on my computer and listen to them later while working so that I can fast forward during commercials. Laura asked NARAL’s spokeman to show evidence for her claims that these centers were being coercive. She gave the following quote from a clinic director as proof for her statement, "The rationale is to get women in there to convince them not to have an abortion." So I guess we are suppose to be scandalized by the fact that pro-life pregnancy centers actually want women not to get abortions, wow headline news. Donna Crane referred to this statement with the damning "close minded." Of course it is never close minded not to consider that children in the womb are fully human with the rights that entails. Being open-minded means being only open-minded to what you want to be open-minded about.
Laura Ingraham relates that she personally never cared about abortion until five years ago, but now from what I have heard on her show she is now ardently pro-life and often talks about the subject. So it is good to have at least one Catholic talk show host bring attention to the pro-life movement. It was also great to hear her referring to Planned Parenthood as Planned Barrenhood while interviewing the NARAL representative and to also ask some tough questions which got the usual subjective answers.
Msgr. Peter Vaghi and Laura.
From an article by Matt C. Abbott.
Catholic and pro-life activist Darla Meyers sent me a notice that Sisters Brigid and Jane McDonald, CSJ, will be speaking on “Living Non-Violence in a Violent World” at a conference at St. Patrick Church in Hudson, Wis. (a parish in the Diocese of Superior) on Feb. 19.
On the surface, it looks fine. But these nuns are notoriously left-wing, believing, among other things, that legalized abortion is “crucial,” though they are supposedly “troubled” by abortion itself.
In addition, Sister Jane has been quoted as saying, “Catholicism is oppressive. I’ve become less shackled since I’ve discovered the gift of the Goddess. I’m much closer to earth and animals. My God was too small, microscopic. I feel I’ve gotten reeducated about spirituality.” She also said, “Get rid of the Roman collar, clericalism, the pope. Jesus would be the first one to say so.”
Oh, yes, lest I forget, I should mention the good sisters are very much against war. Imagine that!
Don’t believe me? Take a quick look at the following lengthy 1999 article in City Pages (the above quotes are from this article):
http://www.citypages.com/databank/20/962/article7560.asp
The St. Patrick Church website is http://www.pressenter.com/~stpats/.
I wonder if they sing "Somewhere over the rainbow" at this parish?
In an article about Family doctor Francisco Prieto who is going to help dole out funds for California’s Embryonic stem-cell research.
Raised Catholic, Prieto considers himself a religious person, but he doesn’t believe the body acquires a soul until about the time of birth. So he does not look upon the research as destroying life.
"My personal religious belief is sort of a Zen Catholicism," he said, adding with a self-mocking grin, "The pope would not be pleased." [Source]
I can understand those that deny the existence of the soul who supports ESCR since these ideas would support each other. Less understandable is how those who acknowledge the existence of a soul and that God creates each soul could then support ESCR. To claim though that the soul is required at birth is rather strange. If a soul is what animates life then to say that the baby who was alive and kicking in the womb was a soulless creature is more than just a bit of a stretch. This might be a useful dodge to ignore the morality of ESCR but it also denies reason. This article was more proof that any article that someone was "raised Catholic" will always end up badly.
WASHINGTON – Democrats should welcome more pro-life candidates into their party and embrace the language of "life" used by opponents of abortion, said the defeated Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Kerry.
Mr. Kerry yesterday praised a recent speech by Senator Clinton in which she described abortion as "tragic" and called for people on both sides of the abortion debate to find "common ground."
"Many of us have talked about this for a long period of time," Mr. Kerry said, adding that traditionally conservative themes of adoption and abstinence "are worth talking about."
Both Mr. Kerry and Mrs. Clinton are considered to be potential Democratic presidential hopefuls in 2008, though neither has declared a desire to run. Their comments come as the party grapples with the perception that it lost support among voters who say they care about moral values.
Noting that the minority leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, opposes abortion, Mr. Kerry said Democrats should not exclude pro-life candidates.
"You can’t be doctrinarian negative against somebody simply because they have that position," Mr. Kerry said in a lengthy interview on NBC’s "Meet the Press."
The tow references to life in this article used scare quotes as in "life." Considering that they were willing to use pro-life as a term this seems rather strange. You can tell how pro-life Kerry really is by his statement about not being negative simply for holding "that position." He soon gets back to his common defense.
Mr. Kerry, a Catholic, said he is personally opposed to abortion, but he said the party need not change its position defending the right to abortion. "I don’t believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people," he said.
I am personally opposed to murder but the party need not change it’s position on this subject.
"The discussion is not about being pro-abortion. The discussion is about how you truly value life. Valuing life is also valuing choice. Valuing life is the exception for the life of a mother or rape or incest," he said. [Source]
I have read over this statement a number of times and I still have no idea of what he is saying.
A University professor compared the logic behind destroying embryos for stem cell research to the logic behind genocide at a Christian Faculty Forum discussion Wednesday.
"My opinion is that science can do better than this," said Russ Carlson, a professor of biochemistry and molecular biology.
Carlson presented an objection to embryonic stem cell research at the CFF meeting for this month.
"I know I have colleagues who would disagree with me," he said to the 30 professors from various fields in attendance.
He used several peer-reviewed journal articles to support his argument of using adult stem cells instead of the embryonic variety.
"Adult stem cells offer a less problematic solution," he said in regards to moral and scientific challenges to the field.
Adult stem cells are cultured from sources such as umbilical cords, fatty tissue and the spleen, yielding similar cells without destroying any embryos.
Embryonic stem cells, derived from embryos at an early stage of development, have been researched for their potential to treat numerous diseases, including cancer and physical disabilities.
Carlson said embryonic stem cells pose many risks to the health of patients, including tissue rejection and tumor formation.
He also brought up studies by the President’s Council on Bioethics — formerly known as the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) — a group of advisers to the federal government.
"NBAC says embryos should be respected," Carlson said. "How do you respectfully destroy something?"[Source]