Any way we can more some of the focus onto OTHER social issues?

[puzzleannie]

yes I get OPs point
I also get the point of those in Germany in the 30s and 40s who reminded each other that while their leader had some weird ideas about exterminating Jews, gypsies, the unfit, and a host of other undesireables, he also had repaired Germany’s damaged infrastructure and economy, established universal public education and was on his way to eliminating poverty. Of course if you believe preventing the poor from reproducing is a valid response to social issues, you may stop considering abortion in your social justice planning.

In this country progress was grinding to a standstill under slavery, and a host of issues could not be addressed while the institution enjoyed government protection, because of the severe and growing divide between free and slave states. Issues of national finance, westward expansion & homesteading, transportation systems, industrialisation, labor, and immigration all required action that could not be taken because of the obstructionism of slaveholding states. That one issue had to be addressed before the other pressing social issues could be handled, because it was the underpinning for a host of lesser injustices.

You do not spend your time writing parking tickets while there is a gun battle in the streets between rival criminal gangs. You cannot direct resources to solving social justice issues which are depriving people of their rights until you first establish and protect those rights.

 

[mapleoak]

You do not spend your time writing parking tickets while there is a gun battle in the streets between rival criminal gangs. You cannot direct resources to solving social justice issues which are depriving people of their rights until you first establish and protect those rights.

Likened to putting a bandaid on your scraped knee when you are bleeding to death because your arm was cut off.

 

[reggieM]

This is a good article about how our abortion-culture affects social justice across the world …

lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111003.html

Prominent Kenyan Physician: “This Administration of Obama, is Going to be a Nightmare for Our People”

By Hilary White, Rome correspondent

ROME, November 10, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The head of the Catholic Doctors’ Association of Kenya said last week that the election of Barack Obama as the new president of the US is a direct attack on the families and children of Africa. Dr. Stephen Karanja, a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist from Nairobi told LifeSiteNews.com that those in Kenya “who know what is good for their world,” had feared the election of Obama because of his pro-abortion and anti-family positions.

“We in Kenya know him (Obama) as a person who is anti-family,” Dr. Karanja said. “A person who would support abortion. In America they can do all right killing their babies. But they must not associate us with the people who would want our babies to be killed.”

In an interview at an international conference of obstetricians and ethicists in Rome, Dr. Karanja said that Africans are now under threat, with Obama having made his radical support for abortion without restriction a key point of his campaign. “Now we are in big trouble because of these Americans,” Dr. Karanja said.

Dr. Karanja expressed his frustration at the result of the US election: “They have no business electing a person who is going to destroy our countries. And that is what they have done. This is something that a lot of people don’t realise, that what these Americans do affects innocent people thousands and thousands of miles away.”

“The truth is that they have put a bad man in the most powerful office in the whole world. And are putting people outside your borders in danger.”

Africa, he said, has been “saturated” with contraceptives by US-based international aid organisations, pushing an anti-child, anti-family ideology. The anti-family efforts of many international aid organizations, however, were frustrated by the Bush administration, which severely restricted overseas funding for contraceptives and abortion. The election of Obama, on the other hand, has been hailed as a victory for many such organizations, such as International Planned Parenthood, which expect a massive influx of funding and support from an Obama administration.

90 per cent of those in Kenya polled over the last twenty years, said Dr. Karanja, hold abortion to be an “abomination.” “And therefore the people who want abortion in our country, 90 per cent of them would consider them an abomination.

“And that is what Americans are bringing to us: an abomination.”

Dr. Karanja described the work of US-based international aid organisations that have condoms, abortion and population control as the foundation of their work overseas: “Those organisations that come to our country … we don’t need them. We don’t need them at all. They come in our country for the purposes of trying to sell an ideology to us, an ideology we do not need.”

“There is something in Africa we have that they should come and learn,” he continued. “Something called ‘respecting the family’ respecting the elders, respecting the children, hoping for the best, and not being ruled. And people from the west have a problem with this.”

The “one thing” that many Kenyans fear from Obama’s presidency, said Karanja, is the renewal of the attacks on the family and the unborn. “The only resource we have that is truly ours,” he said, “is our people.

“Don’t attack them and we’ll be alright. And this administration of Obama, is going to be a nightmare for our people.”

 

[flameburns623]

I didn’t complete the calculation but I think it is necessary.
1.3 million abortions per year times 5.5 years is 7.2 million. So the war casualties are not 10% but rather 6.9%. Given that abortion is directed entirely at innocent non-combatants, one must factor that in as well.

I should point this out also. You’ve used the length of the wars as your arbitrary time period by which to compare the problems. But I see that as a bit of a bias. Why not use a measure of the past 30 years? The number of American war dead would rise (may they be remembered at the end of this Veterans’ day) but the number of abortions would be about 40 million.
That is a more fair comparison because anyone interested in the abortion issue (as we all are here) does not merely go back 6 years to start counting the dead.
The fact that abortions have declined by 100,000 a year is a blessing but that may also mean that 10 times more work is needed to eliminate them entirely (to use a bit more math).

OK, I didn’t catch that. Thanks. That part is actually closer to the reality of things than you might think though. Having visited several of my own local parishes to try to recruit support for pro-life activities from the Social Justice committees I noticed an extreme disproportionate interest in your “other issues” – from the Brazilian rain forests to increasing the minimum wage to increasing public funding for arts programs. One of our soup kitchens is directed by a man who is a transvestite (or whatever the polite term for that is). The social justice leadership in the Catholic parishes is dominated by feminist women who openly proclaim support for Catholic women who have gotten themselves “ordained”.

Personally, I think CAF and EWTN strike the right balance.

Your call for keeping other social issues in mind is important and appreciated - I was just responding to what seemed like an attack on the pro-life movement (and I’m glad you did not intend it as such).

As I say, the numbers weren’t mine; the speaker wasn’t addressing me but someone else; I was not even a participant in the discussion thread; and the speaker’s point may have been to minimize the number of abortions slightly and to exaggerate the number of war casualties. (He or she explicitly indicated that 500,000 war dead is probably a high number). So the abortion numbers were held low, the war casualties guesstimated high–by someone else, for someone else’s purposes in someone else’s thread.

I think the point in the other thread–I’d have to look for it again and it was several pages back–was that someone was suggesting that one could vote for the pro-abortion candidate because the pro-life candidate supports the current wars in the Middle East.

Which was a silly position for me. I think I’ve made it clear already: I vote pro-life. The pro-abortion position is an automatic disqualifier for me. As I say I get the point about abortion. Even if I have zero time to dedicate to social causes outside of my job, home, and church–and I am only considering coming into the RCC, I have not actually done so–even if I have zero hours to volunteer, I will give the pro-life side my votes and any contributions I am able to give above my normal support of my church.

But here we are, in a thread I created specifically to ask us to consider talking more regularly–not to the exclusion of the abortion issue–about Catholic social teaching about other social ills. Almost no one has bothered to post in this thread except militant anti-abortion partisans. Who really should have seen their posts removed from this thread and received a firm, friendly, quiet request to post in threads that are about the abortion issue. I’m not seeing threads initiated in this forum by anyone except myself on any other issues except some aspect of the pro-life topic.

It’s a good topic, it needs to be talked about, it needs to be addressed: but doggone it why can’t folks see that we’ve moved into a different political climate, and while we don’t wanna let life issues take a back burner, we do want to win some battles in some areas where we can? If only because working with allies and winning battles on other social issues will give us greater credibility and stature as we also work towards life issues.

The liberal worm will turn, and we need to work towards that day and towards the time that abortions can be brought to an end. Don’t mind talking about and learning about that issue. But I also want to talk about and learn about any number of other issues as well.

 

[fix]

However–we now have a political climate which–while it will not always be friendly to our (name removed by moderator)ut on abortion and same-sex marriage, WILL support other elements of Catholic social teaching.

Says who? Just because the radical left says they want to help poor people does not mean there policies are morally good.

Justice for the poor and for workers, peace issues, opposition to the unjust application of death penalty, etcetera, are things we have in common with those who now have much of the momentum.

Again, says who? Platitudes from the left do not bring any real change.

Can we not work together with the current powers-that-be on these issues? Can we not get Catholic media to give, if not “equal time” at least a fair portion of the time dedicated to social issues to talk more about these other social issues and how we as Catholics can use these next four years constructively in making progress on these other issues? Can we not ask the priests and hierarchy in America to help us organize and work towards progress on these other issues?

There is no end to what many claim to be “social justice” issues in the Church in this country today. In fact, it many places it may be over emphasized while neglectinging the entire Gospel message.

Again, I stress that I am not asking that we abandon the fights against abortion or same-sex marriage. Just asking for us to look at how we can change our focus slightly to work in areas of social and economic justice where we can very well have some influence in, as a way perhaps of raising our currrency and credibility in the bigger issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

Would you think it reasonable for one to say we should refocus our energy away from social welfare issues and start focusing on the salvation of souls?

 

[Sean_Boyle]

Annie:

Read my post:

I GET IT.

This isn’t an either/or proposition. It is a both/and.

OF COURSE we need to address abortion. (And, of course, there is less general agreement among Catholics as to what sort of things address economic justice, war, the death penalty, etcetera). But right now I can’t think of a single program I have heard on EWTN over the past several months (years?) which does anything except harp on abortion and SSM. Let’s not degenerate into a single-issue or even a dual-issue electorate when our Church has so many things to say on other issues. That’s all I’m asking

Do you get it?..

If the party that supports abortion on demand instead supported bringing back slavery and racism in the U.S.could you focus your voting conscience to seeing past those issues and work to impove life for everyone else?

or are you guided by a well formed conscience to end the larger issue of slavery and racism?

 

[reggieM]

The liberal worm will turn, and we need to work towards that day and towards the time that abortions can be brought to an end. Don’t mind talking about and learning about that issue. But I also want to talk about and learn about any number of other issues as well.

That sounds fine to me. But I don’t think you should pose the topic as a subtle-attack on the pro-life movement. You’ve included that criticism in the topic (e.g. that we’re spending too much attention on abortion).

It would be better, in my opinion, to start a thread to talk about the social issues you’re interested in and not use the topic to polarize one important issue against the others.

I’d say that if you want to work with the administration for good social causes, that is great. But please don’t seek to diminish the importance of our opposition to abortion in so doing.

Just pick the issue and promote it – there’s no reason to position it against pro-life efforts.

 

[DrPiano]

Flameburn,

While I certainly see a (rightful) predominance of abortion in the pre-election coverage of EWTN, I do know that a number of OTHER social justice issues were talked about. Some that I heard personally:

Illegal Immigration was addressed on Catholic Answers Live (a WHOLE show) episode in October. Jesse Romero was the guest.

Al Kresta (on Kresta in the Afternoon) addressed the topic of subsidiarty on one of his shows. I can’t remember when exactly, but I remember it was the topic of a rather generous segment.

Al Kresta also spent several episodes on the national hour of his show addressing the current credit crisis/housing crisis AND the reasons for it.

For a year and a half, Al Kresta has been dealing with other issues too: just wages, just war, immigration reform, subsidiarity, welfare, etc. etc.

Raymond Orroyo did a series on the election and the one I caught dealt with the two candidates’ fiscal policies and their implications.

I remember hearing on EWTN that there was a recent call from the USCCB to the current administration to end the raids on businesses looking for illegal immigrants.

The “other issues” ARE being talked about. And frankly, our President Elect believes VERY differently from the Catholic church on how to manage many of those issues. He falls far outside the wide latitude we’re given in prudential judgement on the “how” to handle these issues. He does not respect the principles of Subsidiarity

Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own ability and effort and entrust it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time both a serious evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher society what lesser and subordinate organizations can do, for every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the body social, and never destroy and absorb them (QA 79).
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0604fea5.asp

Yes, the issue of abortion and “homosexual marriage” have gotten the most press - but it hasn’t been exclusive. The other issues have been talked about too. Unfortunately, I’m not as optimistic as you are on the desire of our President Elect to work with us on the other issues. Yes, our current administration has fallen short on many other social justice issues (although I don’t see the intentional evil some people have ascribed to them), but I don’t think you’ll see the cooperation you’re hoping for. What I do think you’ll see are policies in which the government forces the redistribution of wealth from small businesses and the “wealthy” (however they decide to determine that) to the people they consider to be “poor”. You’ll also see our tax dollars (those that could be helping with feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, helping people train to be able to find jobs, caring for the sick, etc.) being diverted to pay for abortions in clinics primarily in poorer areas (through FOCA). You’ll see the diversion of our tax dollars, through the reversal of the Mexico City Policy, to poorer countries - not to help feed or clothe or heal them but to push artificial contraception and abortion. You’ll see it become harder and harder for us to choose where we send our kids to school, and it wouldn’t surprise me if laws on homeschooling are tightened to the point that homeschooling becomes a non-viable option.

Are there other issues? Absolutely yes! But the money we’ll be diverting into abortion through the current administration GREATLY reduces the funds available to deal with those issues. And that’s just the tip of the iceburg.

Someone (I think it was Fr. Pavone) pointed out that a politician’s stand on abortion reflects both his view of the sanctity of human life AND his view on the role of government, particularly in the defense of that sanctity. Having the right stand doesn’t guarantee that everything else is in place BUT having the wrong stand pretty much guarantees that everything else is going to be disordered. THIS is the reason we’re all still so concerned about abortion.

As I pointed out earlier, EWTN hasn’t been silent on other social justice issues (at least not the radio. I don’t watch them on TV much) - and I doubt they’ll be silent on them in the future. Perhaps you just missed the episodes I heard.

 

[JimG]

lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111003.html

Prominent Kenyan Physician: “This Administration of Obama, is Going to be a Nightmare for Our People”

“We in Kenya know him (Obama) as a person who is anti-family,” Dr. Karanja said. “A person who would support abortion. In America they can do all right killing their babies. But they must not associate us with the people who would want our babies to be killed.”
. . . .
90 per cent of those in Kenya polled over the last twenty years, said Dr. Karanja, hold abortion to be an “abomination.” “And therefore the people who want abortion in our country, 90 per cent of them would consider them an abomination.

“And that is what Americans are bringing to us: an abomination.”

Apparently not all those outside the borders of the United States are thrilled with the election results.

 

[gez722]

IAgain, I stress that I am not asking that we abandon the fights against abortion or same-sex marriage. Just asking for us to look at how we can change our focus slightly to work in areas of social and economic justice where we can very well have some influence in, as a way perhaps of raising our currrency and credibility in the bigger issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

While I see your point of using a both/and approach, I don’t think that it’s practical. Since none of us can bi-locate, every minute spent crusading for social justice issues is a minute not spent fighting for the life of the unborn. I personally would rather fight to put an end to the “legalized” murder of the unborn and deal with social justice issues after that. I also feel that the vague concept of “social justice” is what many Catholics used to justify voting for Obama. Other than his being a minority, I’m still not sure why they felt that he would bring about social justice changes anyway. Just my opinion…

God Bless,
Gary

 

[Sean_Boyle]

While I see your point of using a both/and approach, I don’t think that it’s practical. Since none of us can bi-locate, every minute spent crusading for social justice issues is a minute not spent fighting for the life of the unborn. I personally would rather fight to put an end to the “legalized” murder of the unborn and deal with social justice issues after that. I also feel that the vague concept of “social justice” is what many Catholics used to justify voting for Obama. Other than his being a minority, I’m still not sure why they felt that he would bring about social justice changes anyway. Just my opinion…

God Bless,
Gary

Excellent points. How can the Pres. elect be for human rights and social justice for all humans and at the same time deny “personhood” to a segment of the population, the unborn.

The idea of “oh, they aren’t human” so it’s okay to kill, torture and treat as property another humam being, the unborn, is unbelieveable by a man who wants to serve the people. Maybe he should try serving all the people not just the ones he views as worthy of personhood.

 

[Pug]

But here we are, in a thread I created specifically to ask us to consider talking more regularly–not to the exclusion of the abortion issue–about Catholic social teaching about other social ills. Almost no one has bothered to post in this thread except militant anti-abortion partisans. Who really should have seen their posts removed from this thread and received a firm, friendly, quiet request to post in threads that are about the abortion issue. I’m not seeing threads initiated in this forum by anyone except myself on any other issues except some aspect of the pro-life topic.

I almost posted, but then didn’t, because it seemed to have an emphasis on how the programming at EWTN ought to be balanced. I don’t watch EWTN. I do wonder, along with you, what issues the upcoming administration might be prodded into acting upon. Does it have a priority that can be utilized in some way? I don’t know. If it does, perhaps some prodding will be in order. Tax cuts seem to loom large, and I don’t really see a good direction to prod with that.

 

[jc-servant]

OP,

You have your answer. Before the first page was filled you already had your fellow Catholics doing the knee jerk attack on you as if your question somehow lessened your pro-life position even though you specifically gave an explanation in that regard in the original post. I don’t know if that demonstrates a failure to read before posting or just a lack of charity. Clearly many people are unwilling or unable to focus on more than one issue at a time and they assume that should be the case for everyone else.

I find it quite disheartening to see the level of tunnel vision about abortion that exists here. I am perfectly capable of supporting more than one cause at a time, so I get very tired of the attacks from those who cannot or will not allow that it is possible to have a wider focus and still be an effective pro-life advocate. The church’s position on life is comprehensive from conception to natural death, but I see too many attacks on those who choose to pay attention to the entire spectrum of life per church teaching.

I thank God that many people are capable of working on issues for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly as well as working toward protecting the unborn while remaining charitable toward people who don’t spend “every minute” on one concern.

 

[gez722]

OP,

You have your answer. Before the first page was filled you already had your fellow Catholics doing the knee jerk attack on you as if your question somehow lessened your pro-life position even though you specifically gave an explanation in that regard in the original post. I don’t know if that demonstrates a failure to read before posting or just a lack of charity. Clearly many people are unwilling or unable to focus on more than one issue at a time and they assume that should be the case for everyone else.

I find it quite disheartening to see the level of tunnel vision about abortion that exists here. I am perfectly capable of supporting more than one cause at a time, so I get very tired of the attacks from those who cannot or will not allow that it is possible to have a wider focus and still be an effective pro-life advocate. The church’s position on life is comprehensive from conception to natural death, but I see too many attacks on those who choose to pay attention to the entire spectrum of life per church teaching.

I thank God that many people are capable of working on issues for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly as well as working toward protecting the unborn while remaining charitable toward people who don’t spend “every minute” on one concern.

jc- I’d like to comment on your post, but before I do could you give me your definition of “social justice”? Please include some specific examples. I’m not trying to be a “wiseguy”; I just want to make sure I understand what you’re referring to before I comment.

God Bless,
Gary

 

[flameburns623]

Since no one will bother to comply with my request NOT to make this thread a conversation about abortion I am sending a request to the mods to simply close the thread. There are already thousands of threads in this section of the fourm about abortion. Sorry folks.

 

[Pug]

Since no one will bother to comply with my request NOT to make this thread a conversation about abortion

I complied, as did Island Oak, if I recall. You are not the only one interested in the topic of what might work with the new administration. I’d like to hear specific ideas, either here or on another thread.

(the list of Pug and Island Oak is intended to be disculpatory, not comprehensive)

 

[mapleoak]

You have your answer. Before the first page was filled you already had your fellow Catholics doing the knee jerk attack on you as if your question somehow lessened your pro-life position even though you specifically gave an explanation in that regard in the original post.

No, the knee jerk reaction is to that of the implication that too much time is being spent considering the continuing deaths of millions of innocent lives when according to the thread title, we should focus more energy elsewhere.

I don’t know if that demonstrates a failure to read before posting or just a lack of charity. Clearly many people are unwilling or unable to focus on more than one issue at a time and they assume that should be the case for everyone else.

Clearly many people think others are spending too much time focusing on abortion and would rather everyone else focus on other things. A good solution: Focus on putting the talents God gave you to their best use. For me, the priorty and focus will continue to be abortion.

I find it quite disheartening to see the level of tunnel vision about abortion that exists here.

It exists because 50 million dead people is pretty blatant and outrageous and requires an immense amount of tunnel vision or more accurately, focus.

I am perfectly capable of supporting more than one cause at a time,

Great, then why do people choose to start threads attacking those who devote a greater proportion of their time to abortion, or in some cases choose to focus exclusively on the number one threat to humanity.

so I get very tired of the attacks from those who cannot or will not allow that it is possible to have a wider focus and still be an effective pro-life advocate.

Actually, I have yet to see anyone start a thread saying “Why do people shift so much focus to other things besides abortion”, or “Can we shift more focus away from other things and focus more on abortion”.

The church’s position on life is comprehensive from conception to natural death, but I see too many attacks on those who choose to pay attention to the entire spectrum of life per church teaching.

I thank God that many people are capable of working on issues for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly as well as working toward protecting the unborn while remaining charitable toward people who don’t spend “every minute” on one concern.

Why must you attack those of us who are greatly concerned with innocent lives lost that we get accused of hating and having no concern for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly? Should I be kicking grandma out of my house?

 

[Sean_Boyle]

No, the knee jerk reaction is to that of the implication that too much time is being spent considering the continuing deaths of millions of innocent lives when according to the thread title, we should focus more energy elsewhere.

Clearly many people think others are spending too much time focusing on abortion and would rather everyone else focus on other things. A good solution: Focus on putting the talents God gave you to their best use. For me, the priorty and focus will continue to be abortion.

It exists because 50 million dead people is pretty blatant and outrageous and requires an immense amount of tunnel vision or more accurately, focus.

Great, then why do people choose to start threads attacking those who devote a greater proportion of their time to abortion, or in some cases choose to focus exclusively on the number one threat to humanity.
Actually, I have yet to see anyone start a thread saying “Why do people shift so much focus to other things besides abortion”, or “Can we shift more focus away from other things and focus more on abortion”.

Why must you attack those of us who are greatly concerned with innocent lives lost that we get accused of hating and having no concern for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly? Should I be kicking grandma out of my house?

Add to these points…

If human diginity isn’t a right for all humans (including the unborn), doesn’t socal justice become an oxymoron in society?

Socal justice becomes just a polical term with no meaning if human right are not given to all humans.

 

[Proletarian]

OP,

You have your answer. Before the first page was filled you already had your fellow Catholics doing the knee jerk attack on you as if your question somehow lessened your pro-life position even though you specifically gave an explanation in that regard in the original post. I don’t know if that demonstrates a failure to read before posting or just a lack of charity. Clearly many people are unwilling or unable to focus on more than one issue at a time and they assume that should be the case for everyone else.

I find it quite disheartening to see the level of tunnel vision about abortion that exists here. I am perfectly capable of supporting more than one cause at a time, so I get very tired of the attacks from those who cannot or will not allow that it is possible to have a wider focus and still be an effective pro-life advocate. The church’s position on life is comprehensive from conception to natural death, but I see too many attacks on those who choose to pay attention to the entire spectrum of life per church teaching.

I thank God that many people are capable of working on issues for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly as well as working toward protecting the unborn while remaining charitable toward people who don’t spend “every minute” on one concern.

Hear, hear!

 

[reggieM]

No, the knee jerk reaction is to that of the implication that too much time is being spent considering the continuing deaths of millions of innocent lives when according to the thread title, we should focus more energy elsewhere.

Clearly many people think others are spending too much time focusing on abortion and would rather everyone else focus on other things. A good solution: Focus on putting the talents God gave you to their best use. For me, the priorty and focus will continue to be abortion.

It exists because 50 million dead people is pretty blatant and outrageous and requires an immense amount of tunnel vision or more accurately, focus.

Great, then why do people choose to start threads attacking those who devote a greater proportion of their time to abortion, or in some cases choose to focus exclusively on the number one threat to humanity.
Actually, I have yet to see anyone start a thread saying “Why do people shift so much focus to other things besides abortion”, or “Can we shift more focus away from other things and focus more on abortion”.

Why must you attack those of us who are greatly concerned with innocent lives lost that we get accused of hating and having no concern for disabled children who have been born and the poor and the elderly? Should I be kicking grandma out of my house?

I agree with the above.

As to the notion that we can supposedly “support more than one cause at a time”, I don’t find this a reality at the local level.

Every local pro-life group that I know of (correct me if you know of others) is short-staffed, low-budget and overworked.

In my diocese, 99% of Catholics do not participate in any public pro-life activities and probably 70% don’t even give $1 to pro-life causes each year (not surprising that 54% voted for Obama).

We might look at the millions of dollars that Planned Parenthood raises (and generates through murdering children for hire) – the paid staff, the political support and government protection they get.

We need every Catholic to support the pro-life movement with their time and talent.

The fact that very few do (the Catholics here on CAF are positive exceptions to the rule) is the reason why it seems like there is a “narrow focus” on this issue.