By REY FLORES
CHICAGO — Dehumanization is easy, convenient, and politically expedient in some cases. As defined in Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the word “dehumanize” means to deprive (a person) of human qualities, personality, or spirit. The listed synonyms under the definition are: animalize, bestialize, brutalize.
Isn’t this what the abortion industry does to the unborn? I would say so. There is something horribly wrong when our nation’s laws deny someone the full rights and recognition as a human person.
To deny any and all unborn persons personhood is to deny their humanity. In essence, our society dehumanizes the unborn.
Read more . . .
Ontario Pressures Catholic Schools Over Abortion | Daily News | NCRegister.com.
So you think we have it bad here? Just take a look at what we are heading for in the near future if we don’t put an end to this.
In the present-day world of bioethics, it is commonplace for people to believe that they can make morally valid decisions based on the notion that they are “autonomous” beings who act for themselves alone and not persons who are called to love others in a personal way.
Consequently, many believe that they have a “right” to have a baby, to take but one example, and to the technology that could satisfy their desires. The “autonomous” person would also have a “right” to abortion, contraception, and other questionable bioethical procedures.
From the article: The Person and the Personal: Two Modes of the Same Being – Truth and Charity Forum.
No matter how powerful or how democratic the government might be, if they should declare something to be a right which is not in accord with the truth of man expressed in the natural law, such a right would not be a law but a usurpation of law.
Voting then must be guided by the truth. It is possible that a person would vote for a given imperfect candidate because even though they found some of their ideas about individual laws repugnant they recognize that a vote for such a candidate minimizes the evil that can be done when compared to an even more problematic candidate whose policies are worse.
For instance, this would be the case with a candidate whose policies would allow for abortion in the case of rape or incest versus someone who supports abortion on demand. This would presume that there was no electable candidate who opposed abortion in all cases. Even though both candidates approve abortion, one would save many babies. Their error has no right to exist but it would be a worse evil to elect the other candidate. Evil is tolerated here because of the possibility of a worse evil and the impossibility of completely establishing good.
Without the prior existing nature as the source for both rights and conscience all morals become relative and then only the most powerful determines even the right to life, who lives and who dies. The most powerful would then play God. It is only when statesman and voters do not forsake their private conscience for the sake of their public duty that any country can be saved from moral chaos.
Full article . . . Politics for All Seasons – Truth and Charity Forum.
CNS STORY: Defending life, liberty part of the new evangelization, archbishop says.
In his homily, Archbishop Lori pointed out the irony in those advocating “freedom of choice” are trying to force people of faith to violate their religions’ teachings. “Our ‘right to choose’ — our right to choose to practice the faith we profess, a right guaranteed by the First Amendment — seems to mean little or nothing to many who wield power.”
The archbishop noted that many secular threats to religious liberty “seem to hinge on the church’s teaching with regard to the sanctity of life — whether it’s the church’s teaching on the immorality of abortion, or the obligation of couples to be open to the God-given gift of human life, or marriage as between one man and one woman.”
Archbishop Lori said the link between the God-given gifts of life and liberty was noted by Thomas Jefferson, who once said: “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them.”
Romney Reaffirms Pro-Life Commitment After Controversy | Daily News | NCRegister.com.
When you get down to it, Romney has a good record on Pro-Life issues since his conversion and Obama is steadfastly against all things remotely Pro-Life. Is it really going to be hard for a Catholic or Pro-Life supporter to make a choice in this election? I think not. If you don’t want to be complicit with policies that are intrinsically evil you will know who to vote for.
Catholic Bishop: Florida Voters Should Vote Pro-Life First | LifeNews.com.
Another Catholic Bishop speaks out on moral issues. A vote for those who would support Pro-Death candidates can never be a morally acceptable choice.
CNS STORY: DNC forum explores: Can you be a Democrat and be pro-life?.
It seems that it is getting harder and harder for pro-life Catholics to remain in the Democrat party. This article explores the problems these people face.