Its Over: Stupak Caves

Well, that's it. Stupak and the other fictional pro-life Democrats, using the cover of a worthless Executive Order, are voting for Health-care and federally funded abortion.

I am heartbroken. Heartbroken for the lives of children that will be lost. Heartbroken that my generation was unable to bequeath to our children the liberty we inherited. I am sorry. I am heartbroken and ashamed that I ever believed in Bart Stupak and the others.

May God have mercy on the United States.

Know these things.

There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I don't ever want to hear such nonsense again. They are the Party of Death, no exceptions.

This fight is not over.

Comments

  1. your an ass - 60k catholic nuns want to kill babies? get real.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Invoke St. Joseph right now! St. Joseph, pray for our country that this doesn't go through!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Perhaps not, anon. But they are owed an apology for a deficient Catholic formation somewhere along the line, since they are at a loss to comprehend that abortion is "a foundational matter of social justice and human rights. It can’t be avoided in developing our public policies without debasing the whole nature of Christian social teaching. No rights are safe when the right to life is not" (Archbishop Chaput). Either that, or they fall under the Archbishop's other description, that of partisan democrats for whom "facts don't matter".

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon-- You are the ass. The Network nuns represent only dying orders that ceased to be Catholic in any meaningful sense decades ago.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Never trust a Yankee! Ever.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anon: The Sisters of Perpetual Heresy are not Catholic nuns...they are liberal feminasty social activists with cropped hairstyles and birkenstock sandals.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1st Anon - the NETWORK letter signatories only represent a few hundred nuns - not 60K. There are 60K nuns total in the US and the vast majority stand with the bishops and pro-lifers.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Patrick, there may yet be some pro-life Dems out there. And we'll definitely know by the end of this vote if any of them serve in the House.

    Anon#1 - you know not of what you speak.

    Anon#2 - I'm with you. St. Joseph, pray for us. Our Lady of Guadalupe, intercede for us. Lord, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

    Fr. Erik - thank you for your priestly ministry!

    Sadly, we can thank NETWORK, LCWR, and CHA and other dissenting 'Catholic' groups for sowing seeds of confusion in these past few weeks.

    The lines of division between the faithful and unfaithful, however, are becoming clearer. Let us pray for conversion of hearts to the Lord; a clearer understanding of what it means to be a Catholic; and courage to live as faithful Catholic Christians in these interesting times.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I just emailed Bart Stupak:

    "Congressman Stupak,
    You are making a grave mistake.
    I am proundly disappointed."

    He is not easy to contact. His phones are inactive and his answering machine is full, so I found a zip-code in the Upper Peninsula (Iron Mountain, MI 49801) to use with his email contact form.

    Perhaps you may want to do the same:
    http://www.house.gov/stupak/IMA/issue2.htm
    (But remember Matthew 5:22.)

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Peace for our time."

    ReplyDelete
  12. Time to suck it up, it ain't over till WE say it's over and that ain't happening till the words, "...Thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in Heaven..." come to be a reality.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anon at 4:20 PM wrote: "your an ass."

    Please read and reflect upon Dogberry's final words in Act IV, Sc. II from Much Ado About Nothing:

    Dost thou not suspect my place? Dost thou not suspect my years? O that he were here to write me down an ass! but, masters, remember that I am an ass; though it be not written down, yet forget not that I am an ass. No, thou villain, thou art full of piety, as shall be proved upon thee by good witness. I am a wise fellow; and, which is more, an officer; and, which is more, a householder; and, which is more, as pretty a piece of flesh as any in Messina; and one that knows the law, go to; and a rich fellow enough, go to; and a fellow that hath had losses; and one that hath two gowns, and everything handsome about him. Bring him away. O that I had been writ down an ass!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I am posting as Anonymous because I don't have any poster accounts; please call me JohnK.

    Patrick wrote: "There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I don't ever want to hear such nonsense again. They are the Party of Death, no exceptions."

    After the 2008 election, Jeff Miller wrote:
    ====
    "On the Laura Ingraham show today she had Raymond Arroyo on again and they were talking about the election and the Bishop’s meeting that he attended.

    "Laura Ingraham: Here is the problem, how many of the bishops voted for Obama.

    "Raymond Arroyo: …The bishops I spoke to say that maybe half of their brother bishops if not more voted for Obama. Because they thought the symbol of Obama would overcome racism and be a great healer and unity.

    "This of course is total hearsay and not verifiable. If true, which I suspect it is than it certainly explains a lot. How in the world can we be surprised if 45 percent of Mass attending Catholics voted for Obama if that percentage or more of the Bishops did. Though even if this was ten or five percent it would still be scandalous."
    ====

    By the way (me again), it's not hearsay that 45 percent of Mass-attending Catholics voted for Obama. That's a roughly accurate figure based on polling data.

    Finally, there is the fact that many bishops, including Chaput, largely support 'health' 'care' 'reform' as propounded by the Democratic party, and would gladly extend 'coverage' to 'immigrants' (meaning, of course, illegal immigrants).

    This has not escaped the notice of many, including Calvin Freiburger who writes:

    "...the US Conference of Catholic Bishops’ resolution on universal health care parrots the leftist caricature of American healthcare...Nowhere in the document will you find skepticism as to government’s ability to provide universal healthcare, concern for the individual rights and personal freedoms that such an overhaul would violate, or awareness of the potential for market-based reforms to alleviate America’s health care woes, which the USCCB exaggerates.... The intersection of Catholicism and liberalism isn’t limited to the USCCB, either. Pope Benedict and the Vatican have a history of criticizing and meddling in America’s already-meager immigration enforcement efforts, and, most recently, the Vatican’s official newspaper announced that Karl Marx wasn’t so bad after all. I kid you not."

    So, Patrick; "There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I don't ever want to hear such nonsense again. They are the Party of Death, no exceptions."

    And all their supporters, useful idiots, and fellow-travelers, too?

    ReplyDelete
  15. The fight's not over, Patrick, but it's time we take it to the Church.

    Enough of this nonsense of the "I'm Catholic, but..." politician shmoozing in the Communion line on Sunday morning and voting to kill babies in the afternoon. It's time to call these turncoats what they are. We can't let them have the political cover of "Oh, but I waited until we had a worthless promise of a meaningless EO from the most pro-abortion president we've ever had!" either. They want to be weak on abortion, and be Catholic? Fine--but they won't stay in Congress anymore. Gloves off, people.

    As for the CHA and the dissident nuns--well, where's a good old fashioned interdict when you need one?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous said...

    your an ass - 60k catholic nuns want to kill babies? get real.

    First of all, it's "you're an ass."
    Second of all, the fact that you jump straight to name calling underscores the integrity of YOUR point, if indeed you have one.
    Factcheck.org doesn't believe Pres. Obama when he says federal money will not go to abortion (doesn't the president have ties to the Annenberg Foundation which runs Factcheck.org?); why should anyone else?
    Is there a reason that it was so crucial to pass this bill on the Lord's day? Insult to injury?

    ReplyDelete
  17. March 21, 2010 5:26 PM
    Anonymous said... So, Patrick; "There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I don't ever want to hear such nonsense again. They are the Party of Death, no exceptions."

    And all their supporters, useful idiots, and fellow-travelers, too?

    I'm not Patrick but, IMHO, yes they are. Aiding and abetting the commission of Murder.

    I recently observed a lady pull out of the parking lot of a local Methodist Church. Her Mercury Grand Marquis had the following bumper sticker...Christian Democrat.

    How can you you be a Christian when you advocate the murder of the unborn and our senior citizens alike???

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think you can paint Bart Stupak with the same broad brush as Ben Nelson, who sold out the unborn for a hundred million pieces of silver. I think it's likely that Stupak became convinced that the bill was going to pass with or without the support of him and his dwindling coalition, and made the difficult decision that the healthcare bill with an EO was a lesser evil than the healthcare bill without an EO. In other words, he did the best he could under the circumstances, which is very different from selling out. Had the original 12 hung tight, this wouldn't have happened.
    ~Siobhan

    ReplyDelete
  19. How dare you turn on Bart Stupak like this.

    Do you really think this guy is a "sell out"?

    Half the country already hated him, now the other half does too.

    He is a man of courage and consciene though, in the tradition of St. Thomas More.

    If you don't like the idea of gov't run health care, that is fine, that is all well and good. However even if a European style health care plan is stupid/bad/expensive etc. it is not evil. Toss in abortion and it is evil

    Stupak made a stand and he kept abortion out of it. I am a huge fan of this blog and this is the first time I have ever found myself just outraged at something written on it.

    Bart Stupak is a man all us Catholics can and should be proud of and I will continue to stand by him.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "This fight is not over."

    That is right...it has just started and will consume many years. The Democrats have split the country (again)...first as they did back over slavery; and now over the utter evil of abortion along with the tyranny of government intrusion into our lives and liberty.

    Like the Volstead Act (18th Amendment) anything can be repealed. I pray that their Party is doomed for decades to come. As Rabbi of Bratslav, Nachman pleaded with his weary disciples, "Do not despair. There is no such thing as despair!"

    ReplyDelete
  21. All you have to remember is that the Mexico City policy is governed by Executive Order and I think we all remember how that one went down.

    Yeah, I'll trust Obama to keep that EO in place.

    God help us.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Following are excerpts taken from Stupak's opponent's Facebook page. I never heard of him before today, but he seems a very solid conservative: a doctor and prolife (but his prolife statement is the last in a long list of his positions, so I wonder how strong they are). But check it out. After this Stupak has to go.
    Kit
    Hi, I am Dan Benishek. I am running for U.S. Congress in Michigan’s 1st District and would like your support.

    Please send contributions to:
    Benishek for Congress
    802 Pentoga Trail
    Crystal Falls, MI 49920

    ReplyDelete
  23. You let us down, Stupak.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I never trusted Stupak would stand firm. His record supporting funding PP made me suspicious. He knows the Executive Order will not stand. He was just waiting for an excuse.

    I am so very disappointed, but not as disappointed as my children are who put their hearts into protesting this bill yesterday. They have been sold out.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I saw the story on CNN about Rep. Stupak supporting the Healthcare bill with the EO providing additional safeguards. Perhaps I am just in denial about Stupak caving, but the story seems a bit fishy to me. The inability of an executive order to curtail legislation was in the news all day yesterday, meaning that Stupak must have been aware of this for some time. Either his pro-life stance was really a sham, or we are not getting the whole story.

    In either case, may God have mercy on this country!

    JDTB

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wait, what am I missing here? What is the difference between the "Stupak Ammendment" and the "Executive order to enforce the Hyde ammendment"? I read the verbiage and it sounds the same to me.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Early Riser, the difference is that the Stupak Amendment would have been enacted as a piece of legislation. It's repeal would necessitate Congressional action.

    On the other hand an Executive Order can be repealed at the stroke of a pen by any sitting President, for an example of this check out how the Mexico City Policy has been knocked about like a pingpong ball over the course of different administrations.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Well, there go my plans to move to his district.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The fight is not over until he comes. Good will triumph evil. We must continue the good fight.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Subvet, thanks for the clarification. At the risk of getting all Pollyana here, I'm going to give this process the benefit of the doubt. In home construction, you don't lay bricks without the wooden frame. We can always have an ammendment to the bill after the fact if and when the Republicans- should they chose to finally walk the walk on abortion- take the majority. But if Obama does as promised, in the meantime there will be the executive order which will provide for everything the Stupak ammendment would have.

    Other than the potential for the executive order being repealed at anytime (and it doesn't seem logical it would be repealed, at least not anytime soon), I can't see any issue here. But of course I'll wait for the bishops to weigh in here before making my mind up on this. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Archbishop Chaput denounces false 'Catholic witness' in health care support link:
    http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/archbishop_chaput_those_confusing_catholic_stance_on_health_care_will_bear_blame_if_bill_passes/

    Translation of Abp. Chaput's teaching: If those "nuns" don't repent and make up for the damage of their false teaching, they will burn in hell for all eternity.

    Pelosi & other Catholic pols who support abortion are excommunicated automatically when they cast their votes. So, God will not be mocked and the unborn children's murders will not be avenged.

    And God's people will take back the Church from the liberal nuns and false leaders. A sleeping giant has been awakened both in the Church and in the country. Roe will be reversed; Socialism will be stopped. We shall struggle and we shall win.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat."

    I really do not want to believe that, because if it is true, then the pro-life cause is more or less dead in the water in this country for the foreseeable future. The cause of life will not succeed so long as it is purely the partisan preserve of one political party.

    In any case, whatever Stupak did - and I fault him much more for gullibility than mendacity here - other Democrats are voting against this monstrosity, and a few of them are doing so over abortion funding. Let us not forget that.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "I don't think you can paint Bart Stupak with the same broad brush as Ben Nelson, who sold out the unborn for a hundred million pieces of silver. I think it's likely that Stupak became convinced that the bill was going to pass with or without the support of him and his dwindling coalition, and made the difficult decision that the healthcare bill with an EO was a lesser evil than the healthcare bill without an EO. In other words, he did the best he could under the circumstances, which is very different from selling out. Had the original 12 hung tight, this wouldn't have happened.
    ~Siobhan"

    Exactly, Siobhan. I don't understand the violence of the language being used here. Stupak may in the end have made a bad decision, but let's at least consider the possibility that he was doing everything he could in good faith to keep abortion out of health care, and is voting for it in the hope the President will keep his word.

    My memory doesn't quite stretch back that far, but I'm willing to bet the the author of the Hyde Amendment himself, Rep. Henry Hyde, took a lot of flack for actually agreeing to allow the federal government to fund ANY abortions - those for mother's life, rape and incest. Yet quite a lot of good has come out of that amendment.

    And now what if we did something totally counter-intuitive and wrote to thank the President for respecting the Hyde amendment and the principles of the pro-life representatives in Congress?

    Because guess what, folks? Obama is not Satan (though saying so may make you feel good). HE IS A POLITICIAN. Politicians want to be popular. He is sinking in the polls at the moment. If he sees he is becoming more popular by issuing this executive order, he will be more likely to abide by it. I'm sure he's already realizing that the pro-abort camp is just a millstone around his neck.

    I guess he didn't realize when he was elected that the country was really turning in the pro-life direction. Most politicians will bend with the wind that is blowing. We can encourage him to do so.

    And then let's be sure that we get all the pro-death ideologues out of Congress in November, and put some people in place who will craft some sensible legislation that repeals or amends the whole monstrosity of a bill, and will instead enact some sensible health care legislation.

    Threatening extinction to the fragile tribe of pro-life Democrats (or much worse, denying their existence) is not going to help. We need more, not fewer of them. We need to work with the situation we've got, not sit around uselessly moaning and carping and failing to understand political realities.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "In other words, he did the best he could under the circumstances, which is very different from selling out."

    "Selling out" would mean giving away his vote for a dam project or some other slushola for his district (like say Ben Nelson or Mary Landrieux). Instead, he changed his vote because he was offered something which appeared on its surface to address his central concern that the government fund abortions.

    Now, he may be enormously gullible. He may be tremendously naive. He may have shown very bad judgment. And I am certainly massively, massively disappointed in him. But I won't call him a "sellout." I don't think anyone else should either.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Threatening extinction to the fragile tribe of pro-life Democrats (or much worse, denying their existence) is not going to help. We need more, not fewer of them.

    Amen.

    May their tribe increase.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows"
    Galatians 6:7 (New International Version)
    May God have mercy on the United States of America...we shall need it after tonight

    ReplyDelete
  37. And so, the bishops will publicly excommunicate Stupak, Pelosi, Biden and any other sad pro-choice Catholic politicians who vote contrary to the USCCB position on the bill -- first thing tomorrow? Right? Right?

    Sigh.

    ReplyDelete
  38. There are no pro-life Democrats, there are only Democrats who need to say certain things to get elected in pro-life districts.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The United States of America 7/4/1776-3/21/10.

    We shall contiune to fight the good fight, run the race and endure till the end. May Almighty God Have Mercy on our Country!!! Our good and free country has been taken over by evil men and women.
    This was brought about by men and women who stopped being Catholic... Name Only, Cafeteria, Heretical, Modernistic Catholics!!!!!!!!!!!
    Thanks Mr. Stupak...

    ReplyDelete
  40. Woe to pregnant women and nursing mothers in those days. Mt 24:19
    As they led him away they took hold of a certain Simon, a Cyrenian, who was coming in from the country; and after laying the cross on him, they made him carry it behind Jesus. A large crowd of people followed Jesus, including many women who mourned and lamented him. Jesus turned to them and said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children, for indeed, the days are coming when people will say, 'Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.' At that time people will say to the mountains, 'Fall upon us!' and to the hills, 'Cover us!' for if these things are done when the wood is green what will happen when it is dry?" Lk 23:26-31

    ReplyDelete
  41. Okay, Stupak has taken a lot of crap over this stand-off so I think he was and is sincere about protecting life. He also has opposed ESCR. Look on his website and you will see that he even wrote an essay defending that view. Opposing ESCR doesn’t win him any votes or friends, yet he opposes it. Many pro-life people caved on that issue. So you have to give him credit.
    Yes, I think that accepting the executive order is risky and demonstrates gullibility on Stupak’s part. But consider this: the courts consider the intent of the the lawmakers. And, Obama and Pelosi have stated repeatedly that the intent is to not fund abortions. Though they may not be sincere, they said it, and the courts should take that into account. No such intent was evident when medicaid was passed, thus necessitating the Hyde Amndment to preclude a liberal court interpretation.
    I will probably hold my nose and vote for Stupak in Nov, just to reward him. (The Republican doesn't stand a chance in this pro-gun, pro-life , and especially pro-Union district.


    mark in da up

    ReplyDelete
  42. Offer it all to the Lord and remain in peace.

    ReplyDelete
  43. We'll find out if the Executive Order is legit and without loopholes in a day or so if we hear outrage from Plan Parenthood.

    Joe K

    ReplyDelete
  44. Well, I guess we can pray that this Executive Order will bridge where this bill fails. I remain dubious however. Obama promised a conscience clause to replace the one from Bush he repealed.

    Now that it is a done deal, he doesn't need to keep his promise of course and this is what I fear will happen.

    I would rather be proven wrong of course.

    Whether Stupak was sincere or not. Whether he was deluded or not, time will tell.

    God help us all.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I agree with Anon. 10:33. Offer up your day, your struggles, your joys and sufferings to this cause, to the pro-life movement, to the Catholic Church, to the politicians on both sides of this.
    Unite your suffering to Christ's passion.

    If you're interested in reading a very powerful statement (a good one especially for a Lenten meditation), read "Salvifici Doloris"/ "On the Christian Meaning of Human Suffering"

    ReplyDelete
  46. Please. Anyone who honestly believes in the, "Don't worry, we'll just keep approving your concerns forever," is so ignorant of history, human nature, and politics, that they deserve scorn. Both Stupak and the wimpy Catholics defending him on this blog tonight.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Many pro-life people caved on that issue. So you have to give him credit." Read that again. Judas held up for three years, so you gotta give him credit, I suppose.

    "But consider this: the courts consider the intent of the the lawmakers." I'm not sure where you went to law school, but the courts consider what is written in the bill that passed into law (not the politics leading up to it) and the (supposed) Constitutionality of the various parts of the law. If you are thinking of promissory estoppel, that is contract law, not legislative process.

    ReplyDelete
  48. "Selling out" would mean giving away his vote for a dam project or some other slushola for his district (like say Ben Nelson or Mary Landrieux).

    Stupak will be getting $700,000+ to improve three regional airports in his district. That was announced on Friday.

    From Bart Stupak's site

    So much for that argument. He was bought off. And the Susan B Anthony List is stripping him of an award he was to receive next week.

    from Hot Air

    ReplyDelete
  49. What to do now? I will graduate from college in a year and will have to pay taxes. I am uncomfortable having my tax dollars, however few, fund abortions. Should I withhold my taxes?

    ReplyDelete
  50. This from Planned Parenthood's website:

    “Nonetheless, we regret that a pro-choice president of a pro-choice nation was forced to sign an Executive Order that further codifies the proposed anti-choice language in the health care reform bill, originally proposed by Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska. What the president’s executive order did not do is include the complete and total ban on private health insurance coverage for abortion that Congressman Bart Stupak (D–MI) had insisted upon. So while we regret that this proposed Executive Order has given the imprimatur of the president to Senator Nelson’s language, it is critically important to note that it does not include the Stupak abortion ban.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Bart Stupak met with Barry Obama and afterward came out and said no deal yet. then on March 19th, a couple days ago, there was this press release by Stupak. so we had cash for clunkers. Now we see cash for dead infants and Stupak is the buyer. Barry gives cover with executive order that means nothing.


    STUPAK ANNOUNCES $726,409 FOR AIRPORTS IN ALPENA, DELTA AND CHIPPEWA COUNTIES



    WASHINGTON, DC – March 19 for immediate release
    U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) announced three airports in northern Michigan have received grants totaling $726,409 for airport maintenance and improvements. The funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration.

    “This federal funding will help these airports better provide critical services to communities in northern Michigan,” Stupak said. “I am pleased the FAA has made this investment in our local airports and the individuals and businesses they serve.”

    Alpena County Regional Airport received a grant of $85,500 to acquire friction measuring equipment, specifically a decelermeter and tow vehicle, to replace equipment that has worn out.

    Delta County Airport in Escanaba received a grant of $179,209 to install a 10 foot perimeter fence to enhance security and prevent wildlife from entering the airport.

    The Chippewa County International Airport near Sault Ste. Marie received a grant of $461,700 to install lighted signs on Runway 16/34 and make repairs to the pavement to meet marking requirements and maintain structural integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Siobhan -- and like-minded posters who think Stupak remains pro-life: did you catch Stupak’s floor speech before the vote on the “motion to recommit” (that would essentially have forced the House to start over on this bill)? The one where he attacked pro-lifers supporting the motion as being against the lives of all the thousands of people without health insurance, while Democrats (without qualification) are the true pro-lifers who care for everyone? That speech doesn’t leave us the option of thinking (as many of us had hoped) that Stupak was just taken-in by a bad promise by Obama. He reverted to true pro-abortion Democrat form, without apology or reasonable explanation. I don’t live in MI, but I truly hope — for the good of our nation and our souls — that all the supposedly pro-life Dems who voted for this thing get voted out!

    ReplyDelete
  53. I'm reading it now, and reading about the airport deal, and I am heartsick. I agree with Lori, we NEED pro-life Democrats to outlaw abortion. And I was sure that Bart Stupak was a true pro-life Democrat who would not sacrifice his integrity, and the lives of the unborn, for a handful of silver. The whole concept of honorable behavior has vanished in this country. When did that happen?
    ~Siobhan

    ReplyDelete
  54. I didn't hear the speech but I too am sickened by his acceptance of what looks like a bribe. But I still say we need more pro-life Democrats. If we had more, Stupak and his coalition wouldn't have felt so isolated -- they might have held out, they might have won. Any true effectiveness in politics takes a bipartisan approach. That means we need pro-lifers on both sides. The Republican pro-life side is ignoring this to their peril.

    ReplyDelete
  55. according to the vote count "19 pro-life Democrats voted against the Senate bill and for the resolution to recommit" (that is, introduce the Stupak amendment again).

    http://www.jillstanek.com/healthcare-bill-democrat-pro-l.html

    19 pro-life Democrats did hold out to the end.

    ReplyDelete
  56. oops, 4 other Democrats voted against the bill while voting against the motion to recommit.

    ReplyDelete
  57. To Lori Pieper and Siobhan:
    First, Obama is not simply politician but is also an ideologue. He is an avid supporter of abortion, and never intends to abandon his support or desire to expand its reach. He has proven that repeatedly in words and deeds. If he makes a political calculation it will not be to abandon his pro-abort position but to disemble and disguise it and use soothing language. The actions he takes will never change.Plain and simply Stupak caved, he is no Thomas More, because More died for his faith. The EO is meaningless, it can not contradict and override the legislation, it has no authoritative power. Stupak knew that as would any legislator, that says nothing good about his deal and may point to merely attempt to fool and assuage the pro-life or nominally involved pro-life advocate. I wish him no ill, but he caved!!!!!!!!1

    ReplyDelete
  58. Note: American Papist pointed out the USCCB analysis on the Executive Order.

    “One proposal to address the serious problem in the Senate health care bill on abortion funding, specifically the direct appropriating of new funds that bypass the Hyde amendment, is to have the President issue an executive order against using these funds for abortion. Unfortunately, this proposal does not begin to address the problem, which arises from decades of federal appellate rulings that apply the principles of Roe v. Wade to federal health legislation. According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation. This is the unamimous view of our legal advisors and of the experts we have consulted on abortion jurisprudence. Only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation.”

    ReplyDelete
  59. I don't believe those Dems who voted no are truly pro-life. The party allowed them to do so to save their seats; after Stupak's defection the Dems can afford to let a few do that. But I don't buy it.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I think there may be a few pro-life Democrats, but their numbers are very, very small--only about 1%. Same goes for Democrat Catholics. The philosophy of the Democratic party is total opposition to the fundamental teachings of the Church. Anyone who believes that the sanctity of life is equal in gravity to poverty or healthcare is NOT a Catholic and is NOT pro-life. Poverty is not a sin; it is not evil. Poor health is not a sin; it is not evil. Murdering innocent babies IS a sin; it is intrinsically evil. The Modern Catholic Church and the modern Catholics in it are sadly confused and mislead. May God have mercy on us all.

    ReplyDelete
  61. So, Pat and Matt, are we going to see a video now with Stupak as Sir William the Bruce getting the snot licked out of him by the guards in their efforts to "rough up" William Wallace? I think it's only fitting...

    ReplyDelete
  62. Thank you CatholicMomof6. You really do get it. Not having health insurance is very simply not a question of sinfulness, and so many modern Catholics are confused and misled.

    Socialism is contrary to Catholic teaching, and there is no way to argue that government control or monopoly of the industry wouldn't be exactly that. This would increase the government's share of health care spending over 60%. That is a monopoly, and it is socialism.

    Lastly, you can not really be a Democrat or a liberal and be pro life. And the reason is because THE PARTY PLATFORM SUPPORTS ABORTION. It is an organization, and Catholics can not rightly be affiliated with an organization that openly supports death.

    They are the party of death and whatever good intentions they may have had, have now been quite thoroughly possessed by evil.

    ReplyDelete
  63. "There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. I don't ever want to hear such nonsense again. They are the Party of Death, no exceptions."

    As witnessed by the website http://democratsforlife.com/

    Of, wait, their actual site is http://democratsforlife.org/

    Not that there is much difference. On a more positive note, we should definitely applaud the handful of democratic holdouts who voted against this bill; ditto for all of the republicans who did so, especially those who did so for the pro-life motive.

    ReplyDelete
  64. As a born again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, having accepted Him as my Savior and seeking to live the way He taught us to live, let me tell you this. I am a pro-life democrat. Don't say they don't exist.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment