The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

The Price of Life

February 19, 2009 | 25 Comments

Abortion industry shill Amy Sullivan tries to lull pro-lifers to sleep in her latest Time Magazine piece, “The Catholic Crusade Against a Mythical Abortion Bill.” As the title suggests, her thesis is that the killing of the unborn is just some Krazy Katholic issue, and that the Khurch is engaged in paranoid rabble-rousing against a toothless and imaginary bill known as the Freedom of Choice Act. “At a time when the United States is gripped by economic uncertainty and faces serious challenges in hot spots around the globe, some American Catholics are finding it both curious and troubling that their church has launched a major campaign against a piece of legislation that doesn’t exist and wouldn’t have much chance of becoming law even if it did,” writes Sullivan. The essay is accompanied by a photograph of a lone male pro-life protestor on a deserted Catholic university campus, apparently the only picture available in Time’s archives despite the recent March for Life.

The Inconvenient Truth which Sullivan manages to avoid until well over half-way through the article is that “[i]n some respects, President Obama only has himself to blame for the current controversy.” In “some” respects, indeed. As a candidate, he stood above a pit of abortion-hungry velociraptors and dangled the rhetorical equivalent of a sack of Planned Parenthood medical waste: “The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing I’d do.”

Perhaps Sullivan has a point here: Obama’s lips were moving during that speech, a usually reliable sign that he is lying. The Catholic paranoia could be based on the mythical assumption that he sometimes means a word he says. But this analysis ignores that the one constant in Obama’s otherwise paper-thin legislative record was a slavish devotion to the culture of death. The lies he tells with respect to abortion are limited to those which cover-up his actual advocacy for the killing.

Not to worry, says Sullivan. Catholics are still being paranoid because all FOCA would do is “essentially codify the Roe v. Wade decision by saying the government can’t place limits on abortions performed before viability.” Not exactly. FOCA would nullify hundreds of restrictions, effective at all stages of pregnancy, meant to discourage abortion and promote childbirth.

Not to worry, says Sullivan again. The reason she called FOCA “mythical” is that it never previously gained traction (under the pro-life Bush administration) and has yet to be reintroduced in Congress (in the month-old pro-abortion Obama administration). Quoting a pro-abortion “Catholic” George Soros puppet, her article declares that “right-wing organizations are deliberately misleading people in order to stoke the culture war.”

To what misleading right-wing information is she referring? The claim, originally made by Obama, that FOCA would be signed in the opening days of his administration. And what right-wing organization was stoking this yet-unrealized fear? “A chain e-mail of unknown origin.” Although the one pro-life group she actually identifies, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, gets smeared in the first sentence as running “a well-oiled lobbying campaign,” Sullivan concedes in the penultimate paragraph that “USCCB’s literature about FOCA has been generally accurate.”

So Sullivan’s entire paranoia thesis is built upon an anonymous e-mail which erroneously claimed that FOCA would be signed in late January. And because it wasn’t signed, pro-lifers are supposedly unreasonable to make a fuss about it now. Even though Obama did sign, within days of taking office, and executive order meant to fund abortions worldwide (“but so did Bill Clinton,” notes Sullivan ridiculously).

Ms. Sullivan needs a little primer in the American political process. The best time to make a ruckus about any legislation is generally before it is introduced and passed and signed. For example, just a couple of weeks ago the adminstration was talking about something it called the “Stimulus Bill.” It, too, was “mythical” until it was introduced in its final form just a few days ago. But it was signed rather quickly, laden with social legislation having nothing to do with stimulus, and before a single member of Congress had time to read it.

Obama will likely attempt the same trick with FOCA when he thinks no one is watching. He will declare a national healthcare “emergency,” thunder about the “fierce urgency of now,” and railroad through a thousand-page bill with FOCA hidden in a footnote. The only reason he hasn’t tried that yet is because those who value the unborn — and not just Catholics — are watching very carefully. If “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty,” it is also the price of life.


25 Responses to “The Price of Life”

  1. James Stephenson
    February 19th, 2009 @ 4:11 pm

    Excellent post TR – thanks.

    Where can I find your testimony? I am very interested to know what makes a well reasoned atheist become a theist.

  2. Jeney
    February 19th, 2009 @ 4:37 pm

    Dang, Rav (is it okay if I call you Rav?), you always manage to say things in a way that temper (but not water down) the horrifying content with a little sharp-edged humor.

    This, by the way, is how I like my horrifying content.

  3. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 4:43 pm

    “But no matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is no religion whose central tenet is hate. There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

    Guess who said this????

  4. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 4:51 pm

    Cardinal Francis George, in a question and answer session said after the March for LIFE said that ever since the Cairo Conference, where JPII kicked Hillary’s butt on the overseas abortion issue, the pro choice powers that be have had a vendetta against the CC.

    He said that Obama is too smart to try to pass FOCA as FOCA and that he will break FOCA into digestible pieces and sneak it thru one bite at a time…He knows we’re watching, and will not take us head on…what a surprise. It’s what cowards and liars usually do.

    I’m sorry, do I sound a little bitter when it comes to Obama???? Well I’m not. I’m a LOT bitter…

    Kathleen Sebelius is about to be christened Head of Health and Human Services…that takes care of abortion here at home. Hillary will take care of it overseas. Obama will take care of slipping FOCA through the cracks…hmmmm…looks like they’ve covered all their bases.

  5. Lauren
    February 19th, 2009 @ 5:10 pm

    MK, I’m sick about the whole thing.

  6. Joanne
    February 19th, 2009 @ 6:24 pm

    Thanks for this post. I like “velociraptors,” although the word that normally pops into my head when thinking about those who promote an agenda of legalized abortion, or those who would cheer for it, is “orcs.”

    (Sorry, orcs.)

  7. Lily
    February 19th, 2009 @ 7:15 pm

    mk, I am equally afraid that he will slip FOCA into an 1100 page monstrosity that not a single senator, representative nor member of the public will have a chance to read before Congress signs away another 75 billion dollars for people who borrowed more than they could afford. Heck, it could be in the last bill for all anyone knows! Do we have even one Democratic member of Congress with enough integrity to stand up and *refuse* to collaborate?

    A good ten years ago or maybe a little more, the journal First Things (edited by the recently deceased Fr. Richard Neuhaus) caused a sensation (and lost cherished contributors) when a symposium the journal held concluded that it was no longer possible for a Christian to give assent to our governnment and its doings. I am firmly convinced that we are now there.

    There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that we can do to keep this government from confiscating our money and pushing every damned (and I mean that literally) idea it wants into law. We are going to have to resist and it will likely be costly.

  8. skeptimal
    February 19th, 2009 @ 7:31 pm

    “Even though Obama did sign, within days of taking office, and executive order meant to fund abortions worldwide (”but so did Bill Clinton,” notes Sullivan ridiculously).”

    Let’s not stray into intentional deception here,RT. The bill pays for contraception and family planning…NOT abortions. And please, none of the clap trap about freeing up money to do abortions. Bush cut funding to all groups who even talk about abortion.

    And spare me the talk about how it freed up other money to be used for abortions. If you really care about the fetuses and not the sexual behavior of women, then support contraception and sex education, which these groups will do.

  9. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 7:37 pm


    I saw something the other night but only caught a tiny bit of it…something about New Hampshire having some sort of something, saying that they would refuse to adhere to certain things that are being proposed. The guy said that when at the beginning of the week (this was the week they were getting ready to vote on the package) that there were (I think) 2 states that had joined, but a week later there was twenty. When he was asked if New Hampshire was talking about seceding, he said no, but then when on to say that it wasn’t out of the question.

    I don’t know who he was, or what he was talking about, but I wish I did. Do you have any idea? Cuz, I’m starting to think this is where we’re headed.

    North Dakotas house just approved a personhood bill, and they are waiting for it to go to the senate. This would mean that North Dakota has a different law, than the federal one. I’m thinking more and more of this is going to start happening.

    When Obama one, everyone kept talkin’ about the fact that 53% of Catholics voted for Obama. I kept saying, yeah but that left 47% that “get it” and we are now royally pissed!

    I’m already seeing a difference in how the church is handling this issue. Look at Pelosi and the Pope. That was HUGE! Bishops are finally talking out…

    I hope this is a sign of things to come. It WILL be rough, but at least we aren’t sitting around like victims anymore…

  10. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 8:07 pm


    I think you’re wrong. I think that we DO fund abortions overseas. I’ve been looking for something that says so definitively, but my brain don’t work so good after 7:00pm so it might have to wait til morning. But if it exists, I WILL find it…

  11. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 8:10 pm

    This is from Reuters…

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama on Friday lifted restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, reversing a policy of his Republican predecessor George W. Bush, a spokesman said.

    The Democratic president’s decision was a victory for advocates of abortion rights on an issue that in recent years has become a tit-for-tat policy change each time the White House shifts from one party to the other.

    When the ban was in place, no U.S. government funding for family planning services could be given to clinics or groups that offer abortion services or counseling in other countries even if the funds for those activities come from non-U.S. government sources.

    Obama signed an executive order lifting the restrictions on Friday, a White House.

    Basically, if you google US funds abortion overseas, you’ll get tons of articles confirming it.

    But if you can show me something that proves that we do NOT fund abortions overseas, I’ll concede.

  12. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 8:10 pm
  13. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 8:12 pm

    And this

    The United States spends more than $400 million on overseas family planning assistance each year.

    Critics of the funding ban say the anti-abortion restrictions have resulted in huge drops for funding worldwide to organizations that provide family-planning services and basic healthcare. They say this means many women are deprived of contraception and other health services in poor countries, leading to back-alley abortions and deaths.

  14. Mother Of Many
    February 19th, 2009 @ 9:49 pm

    Skeptimal: so what do you think contraception and “family planning” are? Free classes on Natural Family Planning? Riiiiight.

    Who’s deceiving themselves now?

  15. EK
    February 19th, 2009 @ 10:31 pm

    Dear Skeptimal-
    I am not anti-Obama. I am an American who votes for the best option and then does her part to stay informed and envolved. I don’t just sit back and watch the powers that be lie cheat and steal. I think that you may do the same. Look into Planned Parenthood’s practices. Find out who these so called pro-women pro-health pro-“safe sex” clinics do the most abortions on. ( I am specifically speaking about PP) They do in fact push abortions above health care. The DO push it at primarily blacks and other minorities and the poor. Why? Do you really believe that is about health? It is about eugenetics, or Natzi like evil. My thoughts of course you draw your own conclusions.
    After you look into that, check out this sight:
    Unless you are convinced that you are not being misslead. See what it is you defend. Then if you feel the same, at least you will have more facts. I wish you well in all you do. I am happy you are here and living your life. :)

  16. Pikemann Urge
    February 20th, 2009 @ 5:51 am

    Envolved? Eugenetics? Natzi? Sight? Misslead?

    Actually no I’m kidding. I love foreign accents, especially from females (poor spelling not so much, but if you speak to me I’ll forget about it).

    “Find out who these so called pro-women pro-health pro-”safe sex” clinics do the most abortions on.” Let me guess: women?

    Sorry, sorry, sorry. I couldn’t help myself. Silliness is the justification of life.

    WAIT A MINUTE. Who spells ‘Nazi’ like ‘Natzi’? Even if your written English is terrible you’re not likely to mess that word up. It’s spelled pretty much the same in every language which uses the Latin alphabet. So what gives?

  17. Lily
    February 20th, 2009 @ 7:35 am

    Didn’t you forget something, Pikeman?

  18. Jimbo
    February 20th, 2009 @ 8:55 am

    Very well said. Please keep the information coming. Excellent stuff.

  19. Adam
    February 20th, 2009 @ 9:16 am

    Well said, RT.

  20. frustrated(mk)
    February 20th, 2009 @ 9:21 am

    Just an observation…

    When RT was an atheist, Christians everywhere were praying for him and discoursing with him…they never gave up…

    But now that he is a the Raving Theist, instead of the Raving Atheist, this site is becoming totally Christian.

    With the exception of a brave few (Skep, Pikeman, VJ, BBub), the atheists seem to have deserted.

    I don’t know what it means, and I don’t know what I think could be accomplished by them sticking around, but I just found it curious.

    Have you all given up so easily?

  21. Skeptimal
    February 20th, 2009 @ 10:05 am

    MK Said: “But if you can show me something that proves that we do NOT fund abortions overseas, I’ll concede.”

    I’m going to have to look around MK. What I’m remembering is that in 2001, one of W’s first acts was to cut this funding. Critics responded at the time by pointing out the funds weren’t used for abortions, and either W or his people responded by saying that giving U.S. funds freed up other money to be used for abortions.

    Later, he used the opposite logic when justifying the office of faith-based initiatives, saying that the money going to Moony or Scientology groups wouldn’t be used for recruiting victims. That’s why it sticks out in my mind.

  22. frustrated(mk)
    February 20th, 2009 @ 10:07 am


    Ahhhh…okay. Let me know what you find.

  23. Skeptimal
    February 20th, 2009 @ 10:21 am

    EK said: “Unless you are convinced that you are not being misslead. See what it is you defend. Then if you feel the same, at least you will have more facts. I wish you well in all you do. I am happy you are here and living your life.”

    Thanks for that, EK. I’m not so much a defender of planned parenthood as a defender of civil rights. Abortion is a very difficult issue, and I think anyone who says it is black and white is blind to legitimate concerns by one side or the other.

    The recent discussion regarding the PP offices in Texas was eye-opening to me, because it was clear that those offices were willing to put confidentiality above the well-being of an abused girl. I’m disgusted by that.

    It doesn’t, however, change my concerns about the potential for a woman to lose legal control over her own body. I’ve known women who had abortions, and they were not uncaring, selfish people. Quite the contrary. They didn’t use abortion as birth control; they were faced with very difficult choices.

    I also understand the views of anti-abortion advocates. If I believed abortion amounted to murder, I would feel no less strongly than most of you do. I remember an anti-abortion friend commenting to me back when Reagan was in office that an “accident” to a couple of supreme court justices would solve the abortion problem right there. I knew he would never actually pursue that, but it underscored for me the depth of passion on this issue.

  24. frustrated(mk)
    February 20th, 2009 @ 10:39 am


    It reminds me of that scene in the Wizard of Oz…”Pay no attention to the man behind the Curtain”…

    I think so often, we forget that there is a real human being behind the title “pro choice”…pull back the curtain and you find that he is not a bad “man’…just a bad wizard.

    Pro choice people are not monsters. They are good human beings that believe in a bad idea. Yes we are passoionate beccase that “bad idea” has killed millions of people, but just as you can “see” how we feel about abortion being murder by stepping into our shoes, I can see how it seems ludicrous to you (plural) that we think these unborn “beings” are human people.

    Of course I think you are gravely in error, and that this is one of the worst crimes ever committed throughout history, but even the Catholic Church recognizes that for something to be a grave sin, the party committing it must understand that it is wrong.

    It is objectively wrong, yes, but subjectively you aren’t culpable since you don’t recognize it as such. This means you aren’t evil, only the action is evil.

    There are those, that know that it is wrong and don’t care. These people themselves are evil, but they don’t represent the majority of the pro choice movement.

  25. Иван Соколов
    May 27th, 2009 @ 8:06 pm

    Спасибочки за статью, а ведь это тема :) В букмарки однозначно, пригодится! :)

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links