America won’t change until it sees abortion, not just talks about it. Center for Bioethical Reform has plans for these days of commencement controversy at Notre Dame.
Today the Center for Bio Ethical Reform (CBR) begins its 20th day of operations of the Obama Awareness Campaign in South Bend, IN. For three full weeks CBR has been forcing students, faculty, and trustees to see what America’s abortion President means to unborn children. CBR’s tow banner airplane and billboard trucks have educated students, faculty, and the community by forcing them to see abortion differently. Now, when abortion is mentioned in South Bend it is no longer an abstraction called “choice” but a dismembered baby killed by abortion.
On Sunday, CBR’s abortion planes, billboard trucks, and handheld signs will be part of a massive protest along Angela Boulevard and near the main gate of the University of Notre Dame.
Center for Bio Ethical Reform What:
Ruin Notre Dame’s commencement speech using banner airplanes (weather permitting), billboard trucks, and handheld signs
The sky above Notre Dame, Angela Blvd. and Route 31 (also nearby main gate to Notre Dame)
Saturday, May 16 from 10:00 am – 2PM.
Sunday, May 17, 10:00 am – 12 Noon (Temporary Flight Restriction from 12 – 5PM)
Fr. John Corapi thanks signers to the petition at NotreDameScandal.com and urges Catholics to continue the fight for Catholic campuses. For more information on this scandal and to sign the petition visit http://www.notredamescandal.com/Signt…
“A picture is worth a thousand words. Which thousand words will be articulated to an already morally relativistic culture by the picture of Mr. Obama receiving such honors from a Catholic university. Metaphorically and morally it like shooting yourself in the foot but Notre Dame lives on.” Fr. Corapi
“Short cuts that undermine who we are.” Those are words President Obama used at least twice on the 100th day of his Presidency. Obama was speaking of techniques and procedures considered too torturous for enemy combatants. His objection to these procedures, that he considered them corrosive to our country’s character.
It just so happens that ‘torture’ is a good word to use when describing abortion, also mentioned on your 100th day. For those who haven’t seen an abortion or read of the procedures, the fetus is violated, at whatever stage, whatever age, with or without pain.When ones life is stolen that is a violation. The other victim seldom mentioned in an abortion is the mother/woman, who has been treated as a womb to be emptied. She bears the scars for life while the national discourse is silent or simply frowns on admitting and speaking of this violation to the women and to our “national character”. “Short cuts that undermine who we are” Can’t you see Mr. President your own duplicity in these words also spoken on your 100th day:
The reason I’m pro-choice is because I don’t think women take that ? that position casually. I think that they struggle with these decisions each and every day. And I think they are in a better position to make these decisions ultimately than members of Congress or a president of the United States, in consultation with their families, with their doctors, with their clergy.
So ? so that has been my consistent position. The other thing that I said consistently during the campaign is I would like to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that result in women feeling compelled to get an abortion, or at least considering getting an abortion, particularly if we can reduce the number of teen pregnancies, which has started to spike up again.
‘Short cuts’ whether arrived at by national legislation, medical intervention, consultation with their families, with their doctors, with their clergy are short cuts that still fall far short of moral rectitude and our national and human dignity.
In his third press conference on his 100th day in office, President Obama stood by his conviction that torture is wrong, that water-boarding is wrong. Basically he said it was wrong making the argument that we don’t need it. Obama claims the high ground in protecting sworn enemies of this country from harsh procedures. “It corrodes the character of a country.” Here is the text of exchange:
OBAMA: Jake? Where’s Jake? There he is.
Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You’ve said in the past that waterboarding, in your opinion, is torture. Torture is a violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions. Do you believe that the previous administration sanctioned torture?
OBAMA: What I’ve said ? and I will repeat ? is that waterboarding violates our ideals and our values. I do believe that it is torture. I don’t think that’s just my opinion; that’s the opinion of many who’ve examined the topic. And that’s why I put an end to these practices.
I am absolutely convinced it was the right thing to do, not because there might not have been information that was yielded by these various detainees who were subjected to this treatment, but because we could have gotten this information in other ways, in ways that were consistent with our values, in ways that were consistent with who we are.
I was struck by an article that I was reading the other day talking about the fact that the British during World War II, when London was being bombed to smithereens, had 200 or so detainees. And Churchill said, “We don’t torture,” when the entire British ? all of the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat.
And then the reason was that Churchill understood ? you start taking shortcuts, over time, that corrodes what’s ? what’s best in a people. It corrodes the character of a country.
However, this same man, President Obama, supports, allows and has helped restore and implement legislation that allows the arms and legs to be severed from the bodies of pre-born infants not only in this country but around the world. (Harsh words, harsh procedures! Saline abortions are worse than corrosive, they are caustic, for the infant.)
The pre-born children of this Nation are our future citizens. Every fragment of their being was conceived and formed while their mothers breathed the air of American freedom and protection. Obama has in the past stood side by side with those who sanction collapsing the skulls of fully formed infants making sure they never draw their first breath.
The key to his position may be one of pragmatism rather than morality. Has he forgotten that he indicated that the destruction of his own future grandchildren was preferable to him rather than for his own daughters to bear his grandchild in an untimely manner; His words on the subject, “if they make a mistake. I don’t want them punished with a baby.” This is part of what Obama calls teaching “morals and values to make good decisions.” This President hasn’t a moral leg to stand on.
“We have seen the tragic results of what happens when one life is considered less important than another. It’s unfortunate that the president can recognize that fact when it comes to terror suspects and prisoners of war but not when it comes to his own countrymen still in the womb. President Obama said in his press conference last night that he believes that the abortion decision is best left in the hands of women, who he believes struggle with what they choose to do. Well, we would hope that women struggle with the decision to end a child’s life, but the reality is that with each passing year people seem to become more and more desensitized to the plight of the unborn. Why? For the exact reasons the president stated: Over time, bad but easy choices corrode what’s best in a people.”
Elizabeth Lev, daughter of Mary Ann Glendon has responded to this written by Kaitlyn Riely at Politics Daily. Riely,speaking of Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, says:
“But Glendon has been trained in diplomacy. Shouldn’t being in the same place and engaging someone of an opposing view be right up her alley? Wouldn’t the better decision be to use her platform — or at least her proximity — to persuade Obama to change his views? Her diplomatic style seems to be less suited for U.S.-Vatican relations and more for U.S.-Cuba relations.”
Reponse by Elizabeth Lev, Mary Ann Glendon’s daughter:
“The Laetare Medal is the highest honor conferred on Catholics in the United States. For a Catholic, it has greater prestige than a Nobel Prize for a scientist or an Academy Award for an actor, as the award is given for career-long achievement, for “staying the course” in the words of St. Paul. It doesn’t just showcase a single discovery or film role.
To renounce it, therefore, is not the lightest of matters. Professor Glendon has spent a month thinking, consulting, and given her deep faith, praying about this decision. (This, for those of you who don’t know, means asking God to help one put aside one’s own personal concerns and act in the way that will produce the greatest good). (Kaitlyn) Riely’s dismissive “thanks, no thanks” rendering of her decision, while pithy, is reductive.
Professor Glendon was to have been honored for not only for her scholarship, but for her second career, her pro-bono work — ranging from the civil rights movement of the 1960s to the great civil rights issues of the present day — namely, the defense of human life from conception to natural death. Her concerns range from the aging and dying population to the unborn to the well-being and dignity of every life, regardless of race, religion, or economic status. Her outstanding work in this field has earned her the respect of the most brilliant minds of the international community, regardless of whether they agree with her position. So again, to see her merely as “strongly anti-abortion” instead of as a tireless defender of the dignity of life, is to reveal not only a lack of understanding of the subject’s work, but also the writer’s real interest in this question.
Furthermore, during his first 100 days in office, President Obama has worked tirelessly to undermine Professor Glendon’s lifetime of work; he is funding abortion out of the bailout package and planning to suppress the protection of conscience for health care workers.
Your notion that her “training in diplomacy” might somehow ease this situation does not take into account that she has a five-minute acceptance speech and he will have a lengthy commencement speech. There is no “engaging” here. Diplomacy generally teaches that if you have a rapier and your opponent has a missile launcher, try not to engage.
That Professor Glendon “did not like that Notre Dame was claiming her speech would serve to balance the event” is again facile and simplistic. What is there to like in being the deflector screen for inviting a profoundly divisive figure to give the commencement speech? What is likeable about a Catholic University named for the most important woman in Christianity exploiting a woman who has already dedicated her life to protecting the Church’s teaching by turning her into a warm-up act for a grotesque twist on a reality show?
Finally, after 50 Catholic bishops condemned the university for its direct defiance in honoring a man in open conflict with the Church’s teaching, it is right that Professor Glendon let her silence speak louder than her five-minute allotment of words would have.Readers might be wondering how I know all this. Well, for one I am her daughter, but more to the point, I read her letter with the careful consideration it deserves.”
Elizabeth Lev is an art historian and writer based in Rome, where all of her three children were born… more
Michelle Malkin sums up Obama’s first 100