I want to make a few comments about the elections and some appalling results the nation, and our “great” state of California had earlier this month. First, it seems that Hillary Clinton thinks she is a “California” senator…I thought she was from New York…Of, course, she is a “national” politician, and no one would be surprised at her comments on Prop 85
(http://www.noon85.com/multimedia/2006/10/30/sen-clinton-against-prop-85/). Remember that Prop 85 was the doomed proposal that would require parental notification and a 48 hour waiting period for a minor to receive an abortion. Please go to my July, 8, 2006 article to see more about my thoughts on Abortion and some resources for those who are considering or have had an abortion and are looking for some reconciliation and healing. The Church, by no means, wishes to damn anyone to Hell; it in fact is an agency of forgiveness and love…unfortunately all too many people can’t open their eyes to it. They instead call “pro-lifers” “religious extremists” and “Anti-Choice”… Anyhow, I figured the usual suspects of Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and leading liberal Democratic officials would be behind the crusade to stop Prop 85 (I was right), but I was surprised to find “clergy” behind the “abortion crusade” as well… “strange bedfellows”…:
…As people of faith, we are called to consider the well-being of the most vulnerable in our communities. One of the primary teachings of the world's religions is to love our neighbors as ourselves and to care for each other in times of need…. for entire text and signatures of those clergy involved, click on article title above).
I noticed a lot of “Rev” which is not always Catholic, but I did see one Father on the list. The ridiculous argument of these people is that mandating a child to “notify” (notice it omits the word “consent” as the law in no way even mandated consent, just notification) a parent of an impending abortion would put children in “troubled” homes at higher risk. They would have to traverse the dangers of the “Big City” and battle the legal system to get a waiver from a judge in order to get an abortion. This is an absurd argument. The politicians sound the same, “for most of us, we communicate with our children and would be there for them, but for the less fortunate…” or some similar load of junk…the statement above refers to the “most vulnerable”. Who is more vulnerable than a baby inside the mother’s womb? I realize that there are a lot of young girls who feel (or legitimately cannot) speak to their parents about an unplanned pregnancy, but at what expense do we go to pave a golden pathway for them? Society seems to want everything at the “lowest common denominator”. When we think about it practically: What child would actually feel comfortable going to a parent in this situation? I certainly would not have at a young age. It certainly reigns true, though, for a majority (a vast majority) of families, that the parents have the GREATEST concern for the child. But because some parents are “TERDS”, we have to concede these decisions to Planned Parenthood? God save us!! Does anyone REALLY believe that this organization (of course partnered with NARAL and the ACLU) has in mind the best interest for our children? This argument has nothing to do with our children and everything to do with keeping abortion on demand legal. Hear me know, I believe that abortion is wrong in EVERY CASE, including rape and incest…ok…you know where I come from…now let’s hear where others come from…(Please read about St. Gianna Berreta Molla http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintgaq.htm) . She was a pediatrician who was given a choice of aborting her child or dying, she chose life for her child. St. Gianna’s death is an eye opener about sacrifice and living for something more than ourselves. Prop 85 in no way, would have eliminated any of the Pro-Choice movements “greatest achievements” such as Late Term Abortions, Partial Birth Abortions, Mid-Term Abortions, Early Term (1st trimester) Abortions, or any Abortion whatsoever. It simply attempted to put parents a little closer to being in the driver’s seat. Of course, don’t let anyone attempt to give a child an Aspirin for a headache, or some Pepto for a tummy ache…that of course would be WRONG and would violate our rights as parents. The law does concede many legal rights to the parents (such as for schooling, contracting, medical, etc.), so why is it so difficult to think that a child should have to talk to a parent before having an abortion. An abortion will most certainly have a lasting affect on the child…absolutely emotionally and likely physical as well. As we all know, Californians spoke out against Prop 85 by a 46% to 54% margin (Hurray for Southern California Inland Counties who seemed to be the only ones voting yes on it).
What do we do know? The nation seems to be leaning toward a Democratic (as opposed to a Republican) point of view. Say what you will about “blue dog” Dems, or “moderate” Dems, they are shifting the leadership to the older-school liberal Democrats like Nancy Pellosi (who is a San Francisco liberal). The tide is not good for the Pro-life movement. No one should disagree with the following:
“The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority…among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death” (Catechism 2273).
Remember this when voting next time. Remember what your politicians stand for. Are they against life, or for it? Don’t buy into their lies. Think carefully before voting Democrat, and certainly don’t assume a Republican is Pro-life. Be smart and informed. Do not forget the most important thing, PRAY…PRAY…PRAY…Oh, yes, if you have not figured out yet, “I am an anti-choice extremist”...because the only choice we can make is the choice for life…GOD BLESS!!
Text of Prop 85
Proposition 85: 1186. (SA2005RF0132, Amdt. #1-S) Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. Proponent: Paul E. Laubacher, R.N. (916) 381-7094Amends California Constitution to prohibit abortion for unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent or legal guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Permits minor to obtain court order waiving notice based on clear and convincing evidence of minor’s maturity or best interests. Mandates various reporting requirements, including reports from physicians regarding abortions performed on minors. Authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation. Requires minor’s consent to abortion, with certain exceptions. Permits judicial relief if minor’s consent coerced. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Potential unknown net state costs of several million dollars annually for health and social services programs, court administration, and state health agency administration combined. (SA2005RF0132, Amdt. #1-S)