Who says it's not a good time to end abortion?
by Barbara Kralis
There are a myriad of false perceptions on what constitutes being pro life among pro life groups. Some groups' work is counter productive to authentic pro life work. They are part time or quasi pro lifers.
This fact, that some groups are not really pro life, is the reason why the U.S. is still counting over 45 millions babies surgically killed after almost 32 years of work? Some groups are so flawed they must be called fakes.
There is only one correct defense if we are to stop the killing of babies. We must be pro life with no exceptions.
A good example of a group actually being counter productive to life is what happened recently in the South Dakota Congress during March, 2004 legislation. It involves shocking action taken by the National Right to Life (NRL) and its South Dakota Right to Life (SDRL) chapter's officer, State Sen. Jay Duenwald, an action that will affect thousands of children's lives. Here's what took place.
South Dakota's House of Representatives had just passed the abortion ban bill 1191 by an overwhelming majority, 54 to 14 and was headed to the Senate. Instead of supporting this important piece of pro life legislation, NRL joined forces with pro abortion members of the legislature to defeat the initial bill, which had absolutely no exceptions in it. It was a perfect pro life bill.
NRL then attacked the forced compromised measure, which was still powerful legislation, banning virtually all abortions in South Dakota, making it a felony punishable to 15 years. Even pro abortion lobbyists called the revised bill "the most restrictive anti-abortion measure since Roe v Wade." Countless children would be saved. It would have been challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court, and once there, a viable possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade.
Next, the Senate narrowly approved the compromise measure, 18 to 17. When the bill arrived on the Governor's desk, he sent it back with a "style and form" veto suggesting some technical changes which had to be approved by both houses of the legislature for the bill to become law. Although the House again overwhelmingly passed the bill, NRL's officer, Sen. Duenwald, had a second chance to defeat it. This time, with the help of NRL's powerful lobbying efforts, they succeeded. The bill was defeated by an 18 to 17 vote.
National Right to Life, a mainstream ecumenical face of the pro life movement, teamed up with child killers 'Planned Parenthood' to defeat a bill by saying, "It's not the right time for this bill," a bill that would have met no resistance what so ever...the Governor was pro life, the District Attorney was pro life, both the house and the senate were pro life. Indeed, it would have been fait accompli for the life of the unborn.
The Church is very clear on the sinfulness of NRL's action. Referring to such rationalization, Pope Paul VI said "One cannot do evil so that good may follow therefrom" (Humane vitae n.14; Rom.3:8). According to the principle of double effect, even in a moral dilemma, the act in question must be good or at least neutral. One may not do evil in order to accomplish good. The end does not justify the means. Evil is evil.
It is no secret among many hard working pro lifers that NRL has caused much confusion during the past 30 years because they lack consistency and faithfulness in all life issues, including contracepting, IVF, cloning, abortion, euthanasia, etc. One cannot call themselves pro life if they only are pro life on one or two issues, alleging that a little bit of murder (called 'exceptions') can be allowed.
Wielding enormous electoral clout, mostly within the Republican Party, NRL supports the murder of innocent unborn babies using the 30 year old "The Life of the Mother" ruse. Contrary to this barefaced lie, hundreds of doctors have given testimony there is never a reason to destroy the child to save the life of a mother. Another pro abortion myth that NRL has perpetuated.
NRL also states that a person can support abortion in cases of rape and incest and still call themselves pro life. Oh, really? This is a moral relativism at its worst.
Another dismal fact shows that NRL is not opposed to the evil "in-vitro fertilization" nor to "fertility clinics" that throw away thousands of living humans, or embryos, every year.
Remember President George W. Bush's August 9, 2001 morally unacceptable decision for the U.S. to become complicit on the existing stem-cell research line, pursued with taxpayer's money? NRL came out in full support the next morning, saying, "We are delighted that President Bush's decision prevents the federal government from becoming a party to any further killing of human embryos for medical experimentation." Such a view weakens a pro life position. Was the NRL living in a spider hole in Tikrit at ...
Rate This Article
Leave a Comment
More Featured Today
- Monaco & The Vatican: Monaco's Grace Kelly Exhibit to Rome--A Review of Monegasque-Holy See Diplomatic History
- My Dad
- A Royal Betrayal: Catholic Monaco Liberalizes Abortion
- John Paul II as an Apostle of Mercy
- Embrace every moment as sacred time
- A Recession Antidote
- The Why of Jesus' Death: A Pauline Perspective
- Father Lombardi's Address on Catholic Media
- Pope's Words to Pontifical Latin American College
- Prelate: Genetics Needs a Conscience