Posts Tagged ‘Supreme Court’

Know More, so there can one day be No More

February 17, 2009

Fr. Frank Pavone sends out newsletters that also have text available online, at least for awhile. The past columns seem to be available only in podcast format, so I’ll paste the full text of the current one here in case its print format is eventually not available at the link:

Extreme Compromise

by Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life

Newly-elected abortion advocates often try to paint their support for Roe vs. Wade [*1] and its companion case Doe vs. Bolton [*2] as mainstream. Some even think that the decisions constitute a “compromise” position on the divisive issue of abortion. After all, they say, our current national policy on abortion allows a woman to have a child if she wants, and to abort the child if she wants.

But Roe and Doe are about as far away from a “compromise” as you can find. The decisions allow for abortion throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy, and do not recognize any right of the unborn child to be spared death by abortion. With a nation divided about abortion, one might think that under a “compromise” solution one could find some reason to protect at least some unborn children. But in Roe and Doe, one searches in vain for any situation in which an unborn child is protected. As the University of Detroit Law Review pointed out, “The Supreme Court’s decisions…allowed abortion on demand throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy” (Paul B. Linton, Enforcement of State Abortion Statutes after Roe: A State-by-State Analysis, Vol. 67, Issue 2, Winter 1990).

In this framework, every unborn baby is disposable. Every. That’s hardly a “compromise” position.

“Leave it up to the woman to decide” sounds to many like a fair compromise. But this position completely destroys equality before the law, because it constitutes a complete removal of protection from the child. The lives of unborn children who are wanted and carried to term do not have any more protection from the law than the lives of unborn children who are unwanted and carried to the abortionist. The lives of the wanted are protected only by their “wantedness,” which, of course, can be subject to change at any time. As far as the law is concerned, they are all non-persons, regardless of circumstance. That’s hardly a “compromise.”

A “compromise” usually, and by definition, allows some accommodation to both sides in the dispute. But current abortion policy allows no accommodation to the claims that innocent human life makes upon us.

The more you know about the Roe and Doe decisions, the clearer this becomes. In fact, the Gallup polling company, in an extensive analysis of the opinions of Americans on abortion, admits that the level of support in surveys for Roe vs. Wade is lower if more information about the decision itself is offered in the question, and higher if less information is offered.

These are important points to bring up in communicating with pro-abortion elected officials.

In Judgment at Nuremberg, one of those responsible for the Holocaust says that he “never thought it would go that far,” and was told that it “went that far” as soon as a single innocent life was taken. There is no room for “compromising” about human life. Permitting one life to be destroyed is already extreme. Unless we’re all protected, we’re all in danger.

* links in the online version of the article:

[1] =

[2] =

The comments by Fr. Pavone regarding the polling results when people are properly informed about the Roe and Doe decisions reminds me of a site that has a “quiz” to identify what people really know about those court cases. Please go to the quiz site and see for yourself how well informed you already are, and what you need to learn better. Then encourage others to learn more, too, since the more people who KNOW more, the better the likelihood that more people will say NO more abortion!

You might also want to add the link to your own Web sites, to encourage more people to participate.


Pray for more than we can imagine!

October 24, 2008

This is from yesterday’s Mass readings:

Ephesians 3:21

Now to him who is able to accomplish
far more than all we ask or imagine,
by the power at work within us,
to him be glory in the Church and in Christ Jesus
to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

It reinforces what we already know: that God can work a miracle in this election. Let us pray earnestly for the election of a president who will defend life and marriage.  Let’s beg God for a president who will nominate judges (for the Supreme Court but also many other courts) who will properly evaluate cases and a president who will not sign the “Freedom of Choice Act” or other legislation that threatens innocent human life.

Debate Followups

October 16, 2008

Here are some stories regarding last night’s debate. My time is quite limited now, so I have only skimmed them and am hoping you will find them useful. Maybe I’ll be able to add more later. (which includes a reference to

What Dr. Dobson says about McCain, etc.

October 8, 2008

Here’s a link to a letter written by Dr. James Dobson:

The letter is the October newsletter for Focus on the Family Action. Since the letter is allowed to be distributed freely, but in its entirety, I will only provide the link rather than some excerpts.

I hope you will take the time to read the letter closely, and to share it with other people, especially those who might not yet be convinced that our country needs to elect John McCain and Sarah Palin in this current election. The decision is yours, of course, but please do make it very, very carefully!

Perhaps something Dr. Dobson says in his letter will help you. Although the letter is a bit long, it seems to do a good job of stating the main reasons why the McCain/Palin ticket is the most moral choice.

I was already very concerned about the future of the Supreme Court, but Dr. Dobson’s letter made me realize another reason for choosing McCain. Dr. Dobson tells about the likelihood that the Congress (Senate and House combined) will have a majority from the Democratic party and that if the presidency also is led by the Democratic party then the checks-and-balances of our system of government will be in jeopardy. The list of potential changes in our country resulting from the anti-life, anti-family, and anti-marriage policies promoted by the Democrats is astounding! Please read the letter for more of Dr. Dobson’s explanation.

Please also visit his Web site at 
for additional information.