B
- Status
M
mlchance
Guest
When Pope Paul VI released “Humanae Vitae” (“On Human Life”) in 1968, all expected him to bless the brave new world of contraception. Instead, he dropped a bomb that is ripping apart the Western world to this day. He condemned contraception and warned that it could “open wide the way to marital infidelity.” He said it was “an evil thing” to make it easy for the young to break the moral law. For men, he added, getting used to contraception could tempt them to “forget the reverence due to a woman” and “reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires.”
Hear, hear!
– Mark L. Chance.
T
ThornGenX
Guest
From what I see of the world, it looks like he was very correct.
M
mlchance
Guest
More than just right. I’m thinking: prophetic.
– Mark L. Chance.
T
TPJCatholic
Guest
Most people do not know that the birth control pill has abortive actions in them…many thousands, perhaps millions, of women are chemically aborting their babies without even knowing it–that likely includes a great many pro-life women.
Prophetic indeed.
Prophetic indeed.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
Great article. By why did it call contraception “an unwinnable war”? Truth always wins out in the end, but sometimes it just takes more time than we expect.
S
Shoshana
Guest
Catholic World News…
January 22: another date that should live in infamy.
What more can be said about the continued slaughter of innocent children-- an orgy of killing whose victims outnumber those of all our wars, all our natural disasters?
It all began, of course, with an act of raw judicial power-- usurpation, for all practical purposes-- in which the Supreme Court declared that the laws of all 50 states must be changed to accommodate a “right” that was contained nowhere in the Constitution. At the time, most of us felt confident that the Court’s appalling decision would soon be overturned, either by a more sober set of justices or if necessary by constitutional amendment. But 32 years later, to our profound disgrace, the regime of unrestricted legal abortion is more solidly established than ever. The presidential candidate favored by most pro-lifers in 2004-- the man who has the power to nominate new members to the Supreme Court-- has already conceded that he sees little likelihood that Roe v. Wade decision will be overturned any time in the near future.
This morning, in our Off the Record weblog, Diogenes offered these thoughts:
January 22nd 1973 is a date that, like the name “Auschwitz,” is never pronounced without a vibration of horror. Even the most ferocious advocates of abortion-on-demand prefer to focus our attention elsewhere than the Roe-versus-Wade decision, an act of intellectual and moral debasement so profound that those who profit from it can never quite rub the blood from their hands. Ramesh Ponnuro, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of Roe, made some remarks still worth reading:
The abortion regime was born in lies. In Britain (and in California, pre-Roe), the abortion lobby deceptively promoted legal revisions to allow “therapeutic” abortions and then defined every abortion as “therapeutic.” The abortion lobby lied about Jane Roe, claiming her pregnancy resulted from a gang rape. It lied about the number of back-alley abortions. Justice Blackmun relied on fictitious history to argue, in Roe, that abortion had never been a common law crime.
The abortion regime is also sustained by lies. Its supporters constantly lie about the radicalism of Roe: even now, most Americans who “agree with Roe v. Wade” in polls think that it left third-term abortions illegal and restricted second-term abortions. They have lied about the frequency and “medical necessity” of partial-birth abortion. Then there are the euphemisms: “terminating a pregnancy,” abortion “providers,” “products of conception.” “The fetus is only a potential human being” – as if it might as easily become an elk. “It should be between a woman and her doctor” – the latter an abortionist who has never met the woman before and who has a financial interest in her decision. This movement cannot speak the truth.
For some exceptionally powerful essays on Roe and its consequences, check out the following by Will, Bottum, Arkes, George & Lee, Sobran, and Finnis.
In the early years after Roe, we felt sure the Supreme Court decision was an aberration. A decade later, we began to realize that, in the absence of a more serious pro-life commitment, legalized abortion was here to stay. And by the 1990, the full power of the American political establishment was arrayed in favor of the Roe regime.
Roe cannot be defended on logical or legal grounds. The landmark lawsuit was based on lies; the judicial reasoning was constructed of thin air. But Roe can be defended by sheer force, and that’s what happened. Pro-life activists were gradually stripped of their constitutional rights: the right to gather on a public sidewalk, the right to speak in a public forum. The abortion industry was given additional privileges: federal financing, paid security services.
The overall picture is a bleak one. In the course of a generation, a moral outrage has become not only accepted, but given the full protection of law-- and much more!
So now today, when friends tell me that the judicially imposed acceptance of same-sex “marriage” is an aberration, I wonder. Will it be different this time? Are Christians ready to take a stand-- to pay the price that will be required for any real social change? I hope and pray that we are. But I wonder.
Blessings,
Shoshana
January 22: another date that should live in infamy.
What more can be said about the continued slaughter of innocent children-- an orgy of killing whose victims outnumber those of all our wars, all our natural disasters?
It all began, of course, with an act of raw judicial power-- usurpation, for all practical purposes-- in which the Supreme Court declared that the laws of all 50 states must be changed to accommodate a “right” that was contained nowhere in the Constitution. At the time, most of us felt confident that the Court’s appalling decision would soon be overturned, either by a more sober set of justices or if necessary by constitutional amendment. But 32 years later, to our profound disgrace, the regime of unrestricted legal abortion is more solidly established than ever. The presidential candidate favored by most pro-lifers in 2004-- the man who has the power to nominate new members to the Supreme Court-- has already conceded that he sees little likelihood that Roe v. Wade decision will be overturned any time in the near future.
This morning, in our Off the Record weblog, Diogenes offered these thoughts:
January 22nd 1973 is a date that, like the name “Auschwitz,” is never pronounced without a vibration of horror. Even the most ferocious advocates of abortion-on-demand prefer to focus our attention elsewhere than the Roe-versus-Wade decision, an act of intellectual and moral debasement so profound that those who profit from it can never quite rub the blood from their hands. Ramesh Ponnuro, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of Roe, made some remarks still worth reading:
The abortion regime was born in lies. In Britain (and in California, pre-Roe), the abortion lobby deceptively promoted legal revisions to allow “therapeutic” abortions and then defined every abortion as “therapeutic.” The abortion lobby lied about Jane Roe, claiming her pregnancy resulted from a gang rape. It lied about the number of back-alley abortions. Justice Blackmun relied on fictitious history to argue, in Roe, that abortion had never been a common law crime.
The abortion regime is also sustained by lies. Its supporters constantly lie about the radicalism of Roe: even now, most Americans who “agree with Roe v. Wade” in polls think that it left third-term abortions illegal and restricted second-term abortions. They have lied about the frequency and “medical necessity” of partial-birth abortion. Then there are the euphemisms: “terminating a pregnancy,” abortion “providers,” “products of conception.” “The fetus is only a potential human being” – as if it might as easily become an elk. “It should be between a woman and her doctor” – the latter an abortionist who has never met the woman before and who has a financial interest in her decision. This movement cannot speak the truth.
For some exceptionally powerful essays on Roe and its consequences, check out the following by Will, Bottum, Arkes, George & Lee, Sobran, and Finnis.
In the early years after Roe, we felt sure the Supreme Court decision was an aberration. A decade later, we began to realize that, in the absence of a more serious pro-life commitment, legalized abortion was here to stay. And by the 1990, the full power of the American political establishment was arrayed in favor of the Roe regime.
Roe cannot be defended on logical or legal grounds. The landmark lawsuit was based on lies; the judicial reasoning was constructed of thin air. But Roe can be defended by sheer force, and that’s what happened. Pro-life activists were gradually stripped of their constitutional rights: the right to gather on a public sidewalk, the right to speak in a public forum. The abortion industry was given additional privileges: federal financing, paid security services.
The overall picture is a bleak one. In the course of a generation, a moral outrage has become not only accepted, but given the full protection of law-- and much more!
So now today, when friends tell me that the judicially imposed acceptance of same-sex “marriage” is an aberration, I wonder. Will it be different this time? Are Christians ready to take a stand-- to pay the price that will be required for any real social change? I hope and pray that we are. But I wonder.
Code:
Code:
Shoshana
C
cleofet
Guest
I agree that many people do not realize the effect of birth control pills and I believe that many are also ignorant of many other teachings of our Catholic faith. I don’t think that it should be assumed that all Catholics know all the teachings. I believe that intensive education in the basics needs to be done for all Catholics. I think some parish priests are uncomfortable about approaching certain subjects and just do not bring them up. This just adds to the problem.Most people do not know that the birth control pill has abortive actions in them…many thousands, perhaps millions, of women are chemically aborting their babies without even knowing it–that likely includes a great many pro-life women.
Prophetic indeed.
- Status