Thursday November 20, 2008

---

---

Obama Selecting the Most Anti-Life, Anti-Family Radicals He Can Find for Administration

President-elect unveils plans to dismantle federal legal protection for marriage

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In light of further actual and rumored appointments, Obama's future presidential administration is steadily emerging as a regime ominously packed with Obama insiders who promise to help roll out the carpet for the President-elect's radical anti-life and anti-family agenda.

Media outlets recently named Arizona governor Janet Napolitano as Obama's probable choice for secretary of Homeland Security. 

An early Obama supporter and campaigner, Napolitano firmly established herself as an extreme abortion supporter by vetoing the partial birth abortion ban, and in one month she vetoed four anti-abortion bills.  In 2005 NARAL warmly praised the governor for vetoing a bill that would have allowed Arizona pharmacies not to distribute the abortifacient morning-after pill due to a moral or religious objection.

Tom Daschle has recently been named as the likely candidate for the next Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), an appointment Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said gives pro-lifers a "frightening glimpse" into the new Cabinet. 

The former Democratic Senate majority leader gained notoriety for his liberal views on abortion when he opposed the partial-birth abortion ban, endorsed taxpayer-funded military abortions, and supported taxpayer funding to provide morning-after pills to young public school girls.  Perkins also lamented that Daschle, a man with no experience in public health, is on track to become the ultimate authority on federal health issues. 

One of the national co-chairs for Obama's presidential campaign, Daschle warmed early on to Obama and in 2007 gushed that the Illinois senator "personifies the future of Democratic leadership in our country."

Another likely future HHS member is Dr. Robin Alta Charo, a highly liberal professor of law and bioethics and former member of Clinton's Bioethics Advisory Commission, who was appointed to Obama's transition team Friday.  Charo had been a member of Obama's pre-election team, where she managed science and health policy matters.

Bioethicist Wesley J. Smith took Charo's appointment as a further sign that the Obama administration "is going to push full speed ahead" with destructive embryonic stem-cell research.  Charo once called Smith, who is a prominent pro-life advocate in the world of bioethics, a leader of "the endarkenment."

"We are entering very dark days," said Smith on the appointment.

Pro-abortion juggernaut Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose liberal views on just about every possible social issue are no secret, has also emerged as Obama's favored choice for Secretary of State. 

Meanwhile, Mr. Obama is quickly establishing his public solidarity with the homosexual movement. 

Obama recently laid out on his website a "civil rights agenda" that includes, to the satisfaction of homosexual lobbyists, the dismantling of legal protections for marriage.  He intends to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, the act that protects natural marriage that is currently enshrined in federal law, and accordingly opposes a federal Constitutional amendment to protect marriage. 

Obama has also promised to expand "hate crime" enforcement and legislation by enacting the Matthew Shepard Act, which would allow a perceived bias against homosexuality to be prosecuted.  Obama will also enforce non-discrimination in businesses regarding homosexuality, which could force business owners to hire a certain quota of homosexuals. 

Finally, Obama's website confirms that the president-elect will push to open adoption to homosexual couples, and make military service more available to homosexuals.

According to gay news outlets, officials in the president-elect's transition team have so far assigned 7 openly homosexual individuals to transition review panels, 3 of which were high-ranking Clinton administration officials.  Reports also say Obama is considering deputy campaign strategist and open homosexual Steve Hildebrand as the next Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, replacing Howard Dean.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Obama Solidifies Pro-Abortion Agenda with "Attack Dog" Rahm Emanuel for Chief of Staff
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08110605.html

ABC 20/20 Report Says Matthew Shepard Killed During Robbery Not Anti-Gay Hate Crime
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/nov/04111208.html

CWA Claims Fake “Hate Crimes” Being Used to Force Legislation through Congress
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07041107.html

---

Terri-Schiavo-Like Disabled Woman Allowed to Live after Parents Reconcile

By Kathleen Gilbert

DOVER, Delaware, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A disabled woman's mother has reconciled with her ex-husband after having fought to remove her daughter's feeding tube, and after state legislation rescued the woman from death by dehydration. The woman’s mother now confesses that her daughter should be able to live.

Lauren Richardson suffered severe brain damage following a 2006 heroin overdose.  Richardson, who was pregnant at the time, was able to deliver a healthy baby girl in February 2007 while on life support.

Since then, Richardson has continued to require nourishment through a feeding tube.  While doctors claim Lauren is in a Permanent Vegetative State (PVS), her father contests that she is responsive to stimuli such as voice and touch, and not terminally ill.

Richardson's mother, Edith Towers, had argued that her daughter would have wanted her feeding tube removed in such a state.  In a seeming re-enactment of Terry Schiavo's fate, a court had awarded Towers custody of her daughter, following the advice of doctors who claimed Richardson would not recover. 

But Lauren's father, Randy Richardson, appealed the decision, and pursued legal intervention on Lauren's behalf while attracting media attention to her case.  In July, he won the battle for Lauren's life when the Delaware House of Representatives passed a resolution making it illegal to remove the feeding tube of a non-terminally ill person such as Richardson. 

"It is against the public policy of this State and this State's interest in life, health and safety, for hydration and nutrition that is not harming a patient to be involuntarily removed from a non-terminal, apparently brain-incapacitated patient if doing so will cause the individual's death," said the resolution, which also explicitly named Lauren's case as the impetus for the legislation.

Towers, however, continued to fight for permission to remove the feeding tube until September when, because of religious conviction and heartfelt interaction with her ex-husband’s family, she decided to join cooperatively with Richardson’s father to care for their daughter and to drop the court request.

“Everyone deserves a chance to recover. Life should be protected - not destroyed,” said Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) Legal Counsel Matt Bowman about the case. “This change of heart and settlement has profoundly affected everyone involved. The miracle of life is not something that should be taken lightly.” 

Richardson's father teamed up with the ADF in January to convince judges to investigate Richardson's condition, which had been improperly placed in the PVS category - a diagnosis that has become increasingly undermined by the progress of medical science. 

Lauren Richardson wept emotionally when her mother informed her of the settlement and the reconciliation of her parents, confirming to the mother that her daughter is indeed aware and responsive. Both parents and their families continue to interact with her daily.

See previous LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Delaware House Approves Resolution Protecting Woman from Dehydration/Starvation
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08070711.html

Terri the Rerun?: Father Fights for Life of Cognitively Disabled Daughter
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08020501.html

---

California Supreme Court to Hear Anti-Prop. 8 Cases

By Kathleen Gilbert

SACRAMENTO, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Following the advice of the state’s attorney general, the California Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to speed up the legal process by reviewing three lower court cases that aim to nullify Proposition 8, California's true marriage amendment.

The court has also officially refused demands from the homosexual quarter to allow same-sex "marriages" to continue while the hearings proceed.

Both Attorney General Jerry Brown and Proposition 8 supporters had requested the court hear the cases swiftly in order to quell increasing agitation in California and across the country sparked by the passage of the amendment.  Proposition 8 reinstituted legal protection of true marriage after the Supreme Court imposed same-sex "marriage" on California in May, ignoring a 2000 voter-approved true marriage law.

The justices directed the defendants in the cases to submit arguments by Dec. 19. Lawyers for the plaintiffs must respond before Jan. 5.

Spokeswoman for the Court, Lynn Holton, said oral arguments would be heard in March at the earliest.

According to the Union-Tribune, 6 of the 7 Supreme Court justices voted to accept the cases, three of whom were against same-sex "marriage" in May.  Only one judge favored allowing same-sex "marriages" throughout the hearings.

Both supporters and critics of Proposition 8 hailed the Court's decision. 

Same-sex "marriage" advocates say they are confident that the amendment will be struck down as an illegal revision that breaches the rights of homosexual couples.  Others, however, are equally confident that Proposition 8 will prevail, saying the scope of the litigation that the court will address extends only to the legality of Proposition 8 in terms of the California Constitution, and not to its overall propriety or cultural impact. The Court will also review whether same-sex "marriages" already enacted should continue to be recognized under Proposition 8.

The official proponents of Proposition 8 said they are “profoundly gratified” that the California Supreme Court granted all their requests. The court not only accepted jurisdiction of the cases but allowed the Yes on 8 campaign to intervene, and refused outside groups direct participation in the litigation.

“This is a great day for the rule of law and the voters of California,” said ProtectMarriage.com General Counsel Andy Pugno, an attorney allied with the Alliance Defense Fund. “This order means that voters will get their day in court and ensures that voters will have a vigorous defense of Proposition 8 before the California Supreme Court. We are profoundly gratified with the Court’s order and are confident that Proposition 8 will be upheld.”

Because the Court will allow the Yes on 8 campaign to defend the amendment in court, Pugno said voters can be sure "there will be a thorough and vigorous defense of Prop. 8.”   If the court had not permitted the Yes on 8 to intervene, attorney general Jerry Brown, who is known to be a supporter of homosexual “marriage,” would have been the amendment's only defendant before the court. 

"Since the attorney general was an active opponent of Proposition 8, we did not want the fate of the measure to rest in his defense of it,” said Pugno.

The case originally launched by the city of San Francisco against the amendment has recently gathered other municipal and county authorities as official plaintiffs.  These include the board of supervisors for Alameda, Marin, San Mateo and Santa Cruz counties. Already listed as plaintiffs are representatives of the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles, as well as the counties of Santa Clara and Los Angeles.  The Union-Tribune reports the city of San Diego also hopes to follow suit.

According to the tally thus far, 42 of California's 58 counties supported Proposition 8 by popular vote, including the counties of Los Angeles and San Diego.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

California Attorney General Asks Supreme Court to Rule on Prop. 8
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111801.html

California Democratic Legislators Urge Judges to Void Prop. 8
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111205.html

Schwarzenegger Assures Same-Sex Couples Previous "Marriages" Intact
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111102.html

---

Arnold Schwarzenegger's Wife: I'm "a Catholic in Good Standing" But Also Pro-abortion and Pro-Homosexual

By Kathleen Gilbert

LONG BEACH, California, November 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – California’s first lady, Maria Shriver, recently told Sally Quinn of the Washington Post that she considers herself "a Catholic in good standing" despite the fact that she openly advocates abortion.

"I find I don't spend a lot of time trying to square my own daily life with the institutional Church," said Shriver.  "I pick and choose."

Shriver called herself a "cafeteria Catholic," a term that is most often used in a derogatory manner, referring to individuals who only selectively submit to Church teaching and authority while still calling themselves Catholic.

On the disparity between Church teaching and her belief on abortion, Shriver told Quinn, "I often talk to my daughters at the dinner table about the difference between being pro-abortion and being pro-choice."  She explained that she believes supporting the right to choose an abortion is different from supporting abortion.

Shriver also pointed out her disagreement with the Church on the issue of homosexuality.  She said she does not believe that "people who are gay shouldn't be accepted into the church."  However, while the Catholic Church teaches that all sexual activity outside of marriage, including homosexual activity, is sinful, there is no prohibition against people with homosexual inclinations being welcomed into the Church. The Church strongly recommends loving acceptance of such persons and spiritual direction and other assistance to help them live celebate, faithful Catholic lives. 

The office of Cardinal Mahoney, Shriver's bishop, did not respond to repeated calls from LifeSiteNews.com yestereday and today up to press time.

Both Shriver and her husband, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, claim a Catholic identity despite public disavowal of Church teaching on the sanctity of life.

"I always said that you should not have your religion interfere with government policies or with the policies of the people," Schwarzenegger said at a Toronto press conference last year, as he advocated research on human embryos. 

"I am a Catholic and a very dedicated Catholic, but that does not interfere with my decision-making because I know that stem-cell research, the way we are doing it in California ... is the right way to go," he said as quoted by the Toronto Star.

More recently, Gov. Schwarzenegger put aside his professed faith when he publicly joined homosexualists in the fight against Proposition 8, California's amendment protecting legal marriage as between a man and a woman.

---

London Couple Refused for Adoption over Spanking...Again

By Hilary White

LONDON, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Despite a court order to reconsider its former decision, the Newham county council in east London has again refused permission for a local couple to adopt the baby sister of their previously adopted son. The decision came in spite of a court ruling that called the original refusal “bizarre” and a review panel report that described the couple as “strong, caring, sensitive, supportive and resourceful.”

The couple, identified only as “Mr. and Mrs. A,” were previously rebuffed in their attempt to adopt the girl after Mr. A admitted to having once spanked their adopted son for swearing. Social workers specified Mr. A’s “attitude to corporal punishment” as the reason for the refusal.

Under UK law it is legal for parents to use reasonable corporal punishment. The couple’s barrister had argued in court that the council’s decision violated the family’s human rights, and that of their son who would now grow up without his biological sister. The couple are experienced foster parents and have taken in children from all over London.

Mr. Justice Bennett agreed, ruling that the council’s decision “bordered on the bizarre,” was “unreasonable” and “in dangerous territory.”

The Christian Institute, a Christian lobbying and education group, reports that friends of the family have accused the council of having acted out of “spite” because of the publicity the case has attracted. The couple has indicated their intention to continue to appeal to the courts to reunite the two children.

The case of Mr. and Mrs. A is the latest in a series of scandals in which Britain’s local authorities have been found to be prejudicial against traditionally-minded and Christian families.

In 2007, British news was awash with reports that a Christian couple in Somerset, UK, who had cared for needy foster children for many years, had been struck off the foster parents list because they refused to promote the homosexual lifestyle to their foster child. After a massive public outcry, the council was forced to back down.

Early in 2008, a council in Derby was being sued by Eunice and Owen Johns because they were turned down as foster parents because they refused to talk to children about homosexuality as though it were an acceptable "lifestyle." The adoption panel admitted in internal documents that Mr. and Mrs. Johns of Oakwood might have grounds to feel that they had been "discriminated against on religious grounds."

To contact Newham County Council:

Children and Young People's Services
Executive Director: Kim Bromley-Derry
Broadway House
High Street
Stratford
London
E15 1AJ
Phone: 0208 430 2000
Fax: 0208 430 1066.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Couple Rejected as Adoptive Parents over Support for Spanking
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08103106.html

Court Overrules “Bizarre” Decision against Spanking Couple
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111002.html

Another UK Couple Rejected for Fostering Children over Religious Beliefs on Homosexuality
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08022705.html

Christian Couple no Longer Required to Promote Homosexuality in Fostering Children
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/nov/07110205.html

---

German Court Orders Children to Be Returned to Homeschooling Family against State Advice

The court handed down the order on condition that the children are enrolled in state schools

By Hilary White

November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Family Court judge in Germany has ruled that the children of a homeschooling family should be returned to the parental home on the condition that their school-aged children be enrolled in a state-approved school and the three-year-old in a “playgroup” for “socialization outside the family.” The Homeschool Legal Defence Association (HSLDA) reports that the decision of the judge was handed down against the recommendations of state officials who wanted to “keep an eye” on the family.

The Gorber children had been removed from the family home in January by officials of the Jugendamt, the German Youth Welfare Authority, because the family was homeschooling, a crime that has remained on the books in Germany since the Nazi period.

The HSLDA notes, “Homeschooling parents in Germany face these types of repercussions on a regular basis.” The Gorbers have homeschooled all of their children over the past 15 years. In January, youth welfare officers arrived at the Gorbers’ home in cars and vans to take all the minor children without any notice or hearing.  The children were placed in state orphanages until August, when a court allowed a home visit.

In court, when the Jugendamt officials asked the judge for permission to “stay involved to check up on the family,” Mrs. Gorber responded, “Look at the children. If the so-called isolation and relationships ‘only in the family’ is so bad, can you please explain to me, how, after 10 years of homeschooling, they have turned out so well?”

“They are academically on par at their [new] schools. Their teachers are all satisfied with them, and some are even pleased with their work, wishing they had more students like them. Our children have no problems with drugs, alcohol, cigarettes or other addictions which we see with so many children these days. So what do you want to control our kids for?”

The HSLDA reports that the judge expressed his own surprise that the children were doing far better academically and socially than he expected.

Peter Briody, an advocate for the Gorbers, said that their morale had been “significantly boosted” by supportive letters coming from around the world.

“This gradually alleviated the family’s feeling of isolation and suffering and helped to change the climate of the case, putting the Jugendamt on the defensive,” Briody said.

German law requires all children to be placed in state approved schools, a requirement that has resulted in numerous cases of homeschooling children being removed by the state from parental care. In the majority of cases, such families are devout Christians who want a less heavily secularised education for their children, one that does not include the explicit and anti-family state-approved “sex-education.”

In a landmark legal case, started in 2003 at the European Court of Human Rights, a homeschooling parent couple argued on behalf of their children that Germany's compulsory school attendance endangered their children’s religious upbringing. They said specifically that the state-approved sex education clashed with their children’s right, according to the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, that “the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”

Three years later, the European Court of Human Rights upheld the German ban on homeschooling, stating “parents may not refuse ...[compulsory schooling] on the basis of their convictions.”

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Homeschooling Missionary Family Narrowly Avoids German Deportation for Now
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/dec/07122110.html

German Authorities Decree Ceasefire in Homeschooler Case – For Now
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07043004.html

Three More Families Appeal for Help as Germany Continues Crackdown on Homeschooling Families
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07041609.html

German Court Places Custody of Yet another 5 Homeschooling Children with Government's Youth Office
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/mar/07032204.html

---

US Election Message to Catholic Bishops Part III: The Broken Window Strategy

An effort to rebuild the faith will "come at a personal cost". There is no other way.

Commentary by Steve Jalsevac

See links Parts I, II and IV at end of this report
 
November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Two of today's LifeSiteNews reports provide more evidence of the severe need for a renewal of Catholicism in the United States. Pro-abortion, pro-homosexual former Senator Tom Dachle and California First Lady Maria Shriver both call themselves Catholic and yet don't appear to have a clue what that really means. Is this mostly or entirely their own fault? That is doubtful. Rather, they are likely just two of the millions of North American and European Catholics who are the products of decades of extremely neglectful, corrupt Catholic institutions and leaders who have not taught and defended the authentic Catholic/Christian faith.
 
This series of articles is about an issue that affects everyone - Catholic and non-Catholic, Christian and non-Christian. A healthy, faithful Catholic Church in the US, Canada and Europe would produce many practical social, cultural and even economic benefits for all citizens.
 
Weak, negligent Catholic leadership and institutions, in the observation of LifeSiteNews, have played a large role in allowing the current dangerous situation to develop. Morality and respect for life have catastrophically plummeted in recent decades. That has logically advanced to where even freedom and democracy are in real danger.
 
There is a common sense method that could help willing Church leaders to correct the problems in the Church that left the nation bereft of all that Catholics could have done to halt this cultural collapse. It was developed by social scientists but is really nothing more than a re-emphasis of a reality of human nature.
 
Visitors to New York city in the 1960s encountered a crime infested city core with porn shops, strip joints, pawn shops, prostitutes, aggressive, drug-ridden panhandlers and petty criminals scattered throughout a dirty and poorly maintained Times Square region of Manhattan and beyond. In 1994, new New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani decided to implement what social scientists termed the "broken window" concept to clean up the city. What a transformation it made! The few times I visited Manhattan after Guiliani's program was put in place I could barely believe the difference.  I no longer had to fear for my safety. The smut and dirt were gone and the city was a joy to experience.
 
The "broken window" concept was developed by social scientists who surmised that if comparatively mundane laws (against loitering and littering, for example) go unenforced in some neighborhoods, the resultant and visible disorder then invites attention from serious criminals who sense a vulnerability worth exploiting for greater crimes. The social scientists conducted experiments that did indeed reveal the truth of the theory.
 
A car that was left abandoned for some days in a city street as part of an experiment was not vandalized until the scientists secretly broke a window in it. Once noticed, this was perceived by some elements in the community as a signal that no one was protecting the vehicle or cared about it and that authority in the neighbourhood was weak. That sign of local disorder resulted in the vehicle being quickly vandalized, stripped of its parts and essentially destroyed by thieves. That then created a climate for more disorder.
 
Although there have been many exciting and praiseworthy developments in recent years, there is still a great deal of "disorder" and "smut and dirt" in the Church in the United States, Canada and in Europe as yesterday's report on the Bishop of Lancaster's statements revealed. It has been so bad that for years many bishops appeared to retreat into a protective shell of mediocrity, relative silence and fear or accommodation with their unbelieving flock and pushy Church dissidents. The perception then naturally developed that authority was weak or compromised and that there were and still are many opportunities for those who wish to use, abuse or trash the Church from within.
 
These bishops often haven't known where to begin as larger problems loomed over them, some seeming like impossible challenges. Hence, many bishops have handed over a lot of their authority and decision making to Church bureaucrats, especially those running the various bishops' conferences. However, these conferences have no legitimate Church authority and were only created to be a practical help to bishops, not to replace them or take on their responsibilities.
 
What the beleaguered bishops who now sincerely want to serve the Church can do is place first emphasis on correcting the many less overwhelming disorders in their dioceses. These more manageable things, such as in liturgy, diocesan literature and media, marriage prep courses, clergy dress, Church institution architecture and design, among many others, when properly addressed, will strengthen the bishops' credibility and support for correcting the big problems. 
 
These are the broken windows, the visible disorders that generate or lead to the larger symptoms of Church decline such as the sexual abuse crisis, the catastrophic drop in vocations, and support by Catholics for militantly anti-life, anti-family politicians and organizations.
 
Before he attempts anything, however, a bishop must realize and be willing to accept, as Cardinal Stanislaw Rylko indicates in yet another article today, that an effort to rebuild the faith will "come at a personal cost".  There is no other way.
 
Secondly, a bishop, or any other administrator, cannot even begin a process of restoration without a supportive key staff. The unfortunate reality is that many faithful new bishops, and especially those who are moved into larger dioceses, are far too trusting of the establishment and reluctant to do necessary staff and clergy house cleaning. They often allow diocesan bureaucrats to weave a web of control around them and the newly installed bishops tend to pay too much attention to the skilfully presented, self-serving and often devious counsel of diocesan "experts", academics, lawyers, insurance companies, large financial supporters, Catholic education heads and other Church establishment elements and persons.
 
A faithful bishop is a servant who is best served by others who are also faithful, humble Catholic servants. It is crucial to quickly seek out and place such persons in important positions and to replace those who cannot meet the requirements for the work of a spiritual organization.
 
The next article in this series lists and addresses what I suggest are many of the "broken windows" in Catholic dioceses that need fixing.  Hopefully, other Christian denominations will also benefit from what these articles have been noting and suggesting. It is not just the Catholics that need to repair the damage wrought by the past four decades of rejection of traditional Christian belief and practice and Christian culture.

Part I
U.S. Election Message to Catholic Bishops: Time to Clean House
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111012.html

Part II
US Election Message to Catholic Bishops Part II: This week's Bishops' Assembly
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111412.html

Part IV
Series on US Election Message to Bishops Concludes With Part IV
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08112810.html

See articles referred to in Commentary:

Obama Selecting the Most Anti-Life, Anti-Family Radicals He Can Find for Administration
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08112009.html

Arnold Schwarzenegger's Wife: I'm "a Catholic in Good Standing" But Also Pro-abortion and Pro-Homosexual
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08112007.html

Vatican Cardinal: "A New World Order is Gaining Ground"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08112011.html

English Catholic Bishops have Failed to Admit “Sickness” of Dissent in the Church: Lancaster Bishop
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111901.html

---

Ontario School Board Flip Flops on HPV Vaccine Decision

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

SAULT STE. MARIE, Ontario, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board (H-SCDSB), which last year rejected administering a vaccine for the sexually transmitted disease HPV on school property, has now voted in favor of dispensing the drug to Grade 7 and 8 girls in H-SCDSB schools.

School board trustees voted 5-4 on Oct. 17, 2007, to reject a motion that would allow the provincial government to give out the controversial vaccine at its schools.

At that time Trustee Grace Tridico suggested the board send a letter to the Ministry asking it to "respect our Catholic values and (state) that we don't want to administer a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease."

"The HPV vaccine is not an educational issue, it's a health issue, it does not belong in our schools. I am adamantly opposed to administering any vaccines within our schools, on school grounds. This should of course be between a parent and a medical professional," she said.

The trustees who voted against the vaccine last year said that schools must affirm the Catholic moral teaching that sex is reserved for marriage and that sexually transmitted diseases are best prevented by abstinence, and should not send a confusing and hypocritical mixed message to students.

Trustees were also concerned about the health risk of the vaccine, known as Gardasil, which, according to Judicial Watch, a non-profit interest group which has monitored the vaccine's progress, has been linked to 21 deaths of young women, hundreds of hospitalizations and thousands of adverse reactions reports, including 78 outbreaks of genital warts and 10 miscarriages, since the vaccine was made available. (See http://www.judicialwatch.org/search/node/Gardasil)

Yesterday the board voted 5-4 to reverse the previous decision after trustee Laurie Aceti, who last year voted against the vaccine, moved to hold another vote on the issue, based on a survey which purported to show that a majority of parents wanted their daughters inoculated with the vaccine in school.

"After seeing the information come forward from the poll of the parents, it brought everything back to mind," said Aceti in a Sault Star report.

"I have prayed a great deal over this and in my heart I believe it was the right decision to reconsider it, take a look at it again, and give the parents the choice of deciding what they want to do."

The vaccine has been available to students outside of schools from the Ontario Ministry of Health through its public health offices.

Trustee Kathleen Rosilius, who has resolutely opposed the vaccine, said she was disappointed in the vote, but had expected the reversal of last year's decision.

Rosilius told the Sault Star that she opposes the vaccine on moral grounds, questions the vaccine's safety, and believes too much money - $300 million from the federal government and $117 million from the province - is being spent on the inoculation program.

"When you think one in five kids is going to bed hungry in this country, you think gee (to spend so much money) for behaviour that can be changed," said Rosilius.

Rosilius introduced a motion at yesterday's meeting that a brochure published by the pro-life group Alliance for Life be sent to parents along with the vaccine consent form, in order to give a balance to the information provided by the vaccine's manufacturer.

"Everything that we've had previously was based on pro-vaccine and this is something that just cautions you," said Rosilius.

The motion will be voted on at the board's next meeting, December 10, 2008.

To contact the Trustees of the Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board:
Chairman: Marchy Bruni
Phone; 705-949-9187
Email: .

90 Ontario Avenue,
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, P6B 6G7
Phone: 705-945-5400
1-800-267-0754,
Fax: 705-945-5575
Email: .

See previous LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Ontario Catholic School Board Rejects HPV Vaccine on School Premises
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07101806.html

---

Vatican Cardinal: "A New World Order is Gaining Ground"

By John-Henry Westen
 
ROME, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Speaking at the opening of the 23rd plenary assembly for the Pontifical Council for the Laity, the president of the Council, Cardinal Stanislaw Rylko, warned, "The idea of creating a 'new man' completely detached from the Judeo-Christian tradition, a new 'world order,' a new 'global ethic,' is gaining ground."
 
According to the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, the cardinal denounced the "dictatorship of relativism," rampant in Western societies, in which there is a growing "anti-Christian attitude" that makes "attacks on Christians, and particular on Catholics, pass off as politically correct."
 
Speaking of Christians today he said, "Our true problem is not being a minority, but rather having voluntarily become marginal, irrelevant, because of our lack of courage, so that we will be left alone, because of our mediocrity."  "For Christians," Cardinal Rylko added, "the moment has arrived to free themselves from a false inferiority complex … to be valiant witnesses of Christ."
 
This is, he said, the "hour of the laity," to take on their "responsibility in the diverse fields of public life, from politics to the promotion of life and family, from work to the economy, from education to the formation of youth."
 
He warned, however, that such faithfulness would come at a personal cost.  "Whoever wants to live and act according to the Gospel of Christ has to pay a price, even in the highly liberal societies of the West," he said.
 
(with files from Zenit News agency)

---

Brazilian Psychologists Prohibited from Helping Catholic Church Screen Out Homosexual Priesthood Candidates

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

BRAZIL, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Brazil's Federal Council of Psychology (CFP) has announced that it will prohibit psychologists from helping the Catholic Church to screen out candidates to the priesthood who have homosexual tendencies.

According to an announcement on the Brazilian "Psychology Online" website, the CFP has ruled that "psychologists cannot evaluate people for this purpose, under penalty of infringing the Code of Ethics and Resolution 001/99 of the CFP, which establishes norms of behavior for psychologists in relation to the issue of sexual orientation."

The resolution in question, passed in 1999, states that psychologists "will not carry out any action that favors the pathologization (labeling as a pathology) of homoerotic behavior or practices."

The same resolution declares that "psychologists will not collaborate with events or services that propose the treatment and cure of homosexuality" and "psychologists will not pronounce nor participate in public pronouncements in the media in such a way as to reinforce existing prejudices in relation to homosexuals as carriers of any psychological disorder."

The ruling, which can be legally enforced in Brazil, could make it more difficult for Catholic officials to apply new Vatican guidelines for screening candidates for the priesthood to remove those with "deep seated homosexual tendencies."

The Vatican announced the guidelines for psychological testing last month in an attempt to enforce its centuries-old policy, reiterated in 2005, of excluding those with deep seated homosexual tendencies from the priesthood.  The 2005 pronouncement came in the wake of the clergy sex abuse crisis, which mostly involved priests molesting adolescent boys.

Related LifeSiteNews Coverage:

Vatican Encourages Psychological Testing to Prevent Homosexual Priesthood
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08103004.html

Ban on Homosexual Men From Priesthood Was Always in Place - Decision from 810 A.D. Cited
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/nov/05113001.html

Chicago Cardinal Reaffirms Longtime Vatican Teaching: No Homosexuals Allowed in Priesthood
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jun/05062003.html

Vatican Document on Homosexuality and Priesthood to Bar Men Who Support Gay Agenda says Report
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/nov/05111106.html

New Vatican Document on Homosexuality and the Priesthood Coming Before Fall 2005
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/dec/04121307.html

---

French Academy Elects Author of Legal Abortion as Newest Member

By Hilary White

PARIS, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – L'Académie française, (French Academy) has selected one of the authors of legalised abortion in France as its latest member. Simone Veil, 81, was elected Thursday by the Academy to the chair formerly held by Pierre Messmer.

The French Academy is the pre-eminent French academic body on matters pertaining to the French language. It consists of forty members, known as “immortals,” who hold their office for life. Historically, many of France’s best-known writers, politicians and public figures have been inducted into the academy, including Victor Hugo and Racine.

A major figure in post-war French and European politics, Veil was the French Minister of Health from 1974 to 1979, when she became the first president of the European Parliament from 1979-1982. She was Minister of State from 1993 to 1995 before joining the Constitutional Council, where she sat from 1998 to 2007.

As the health minister in the governments of Prime Ministers Jacques Chirac and Raymond Barre, she pushed forward legislation making access to contraception easier, in 1974, and legalising abortion in 1975.

In June 2007, in a France 2 interview, Veil acknowledged that science is proving the existence of life from conception, “It is increasingly evident scientifically that from conception we are dealing with a living being.” In that interview Veil also said she supported conscience protections for doctors who refuse to perform abortions. She did not, however, renounce her support for abortion.

President Sarkozy particularly praised Veil’s efforts to promote public awareness of the Holocaust, in her “courage in the perpetual struggle for the freedom of women, for Europe or for the memory of the Shoah.”

Not all of the Jewish community, however, is echoing the president’s praise. In 2005, in a letter to then Polish President Aleksander Kwaœniewski, Rabbi Yehuda Levin, the head of the New York-based Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada, criticized Veil's presence in 2005 at the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of Auschwitz's liberation. Rabbi Levin said that Veil, an Auschwitz survivor, was responsible for a mass murder of human life far exceeding that of the Nazi state, by legalizing and promoting abortion.

A statement from the Union of Orthodox Rabbis said, “She is one of those chiefly responsible for an ongoing destruction of human life far exceeding that of the Nazis.

“In her pro-abortion activities she has acted diametrically contrary to the tenets of Judaism.”

---

The View Co-Host Calls Homeschoolers “Demented”

By Jonquil Frankham

November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a pair of squabbles with conservative co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck, The View’s Joy Behar labeled homeschoolers “demented” and Sarah Palin an “airhead.”

In a discussion about various education options for the daughters of president-elect Barack Obama, Behar advocated schooling the girls in the White House, rather than sending them to public or private schools. She joked, however, that rather than homeschooling the kids, a small school with other kids should be run out of the White House. 

At that point Hasselback interjected that she thought homeschooling could be a good thing, whereon Behar turned to her and said, “A lot of them are demented when they’re homeschooled.”

As Hasselback attempted to explain some of the advantages of homeschooling to her colleague, Behar shot back, “They’re afraid of children, they learn to be afraid of other children.”

Behar, who has also called Rush Limbaugh a “terrorist,” also dismissed Sarah Palin as an “airhead.” Her remarks followed a discussion of Newsweek and Time Magazine’s comparison of Obama to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.

Hasselbeck pointed out that the fact Obama is reading up on Lincoln earns him nothing but praise, while if Palin were caught doing the same, it would be seen as “cramming.” Behar dismissed her, saying “we all know that the woman is an airhead, so let’s not even go there.”

Homeschooling advocates charge that Behar’s remarks about homeschooling show a considerable lack of knowledge about the institution and about the achievements of children who are educated in this fashion.

Richard Sousa, Senior Associate Director and Research Fellow of the Hoover Institution and specialist in K-12 education, observed in a June 2007 article that homeschooling children, on average, score way above the national average “in every subject and at every grade level.”
 
Sousa calls America’s public school system “substandard,” and says that “despite promises of reform and improvement from politicians, public school boards, school administrators, and unions, the results have either been maintaining the status quo or actually worsening.” A 2006 Harris poll demonstrated that less than 20% of American adults think their nation’s education is “very good” or “excellent.”

Homeschooling, said Sousa, is a natural reaction against the failing school systems.

According to Sousa, homeschoolers now make up the largest “school reform initiative,” more popular than charter schools and private schools. While the number of American homeschoolers is debated, Sousa places it at about 3% of the entire school-age population. This is significant, says Sousa, when one considers that in the 2002 National Geographic Bee, “four of the ten finalists were homeschooled, including the winner,” and in the 2003 National Spelling Bee, “homeschooled children took two of the top seven spots.”

---

Court Orders Approval of Ariz. ‘Choose Life’ License Plates

Order follows U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of state’s appeal

Arizona, November 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) — A federal court on Wednesday ordered the Arizona License Plate Commission to approve a specialty license plate featuring the words "Choose Life." 

Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and the Center for Arizona Policy represented the applicants for the plates, the Arizona Life Coalition.

"Pro-life groups shouldn't be discriminated against for expressing their beliefs," said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb.  "Many other groups have been allowed to participate in the Arizona specialty plate program.  The commission had no legitimate reason to selectively exclude this group.  We're pleased that the plates will soon be available to the public.”

The Arizona Life Coalition, a 100,000-member organization, applied for a specialty license plate with the slogan "Choose Life" in 2002.  The Arizona License Plate Commission, which oversees such requests, denied the application.

In September 2003, ADF attorneys filed suit jointly with the Center for Arizona Policy on behalf of the coalition.  In January 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled in Arizona Life Coalition v. Stanton that the commission had violated Life Coalition's First Amendment right to free speech when the commission denied the request to create the license plate.  The commission appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the high court declined to hear the case (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4702).

According to the judgment issued Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Paul G. Rosenblatt, "Defendants shall hold a formal meeting in their official capacity as the Arizona License Plate Commission no later than January 23, 2009.  At that meeting, Defendants shall approve Plaintiffs' application of September 27, 2002, for a specialty license plate.”

The full text of the judgment issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona in Arizona Life Coalition v. Stanton is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/ALCjudgment.

---

Letters to the Editor for Thursday, November 20, 2008

Dear Editor,

I for one appreciate the fact that I get true news from LifeSiteNews. My not for profit ministry is now using GoodSearch exclusively as our search engine, with you as the recipient, in an effort to give back what little we can to this most worthy of internet news resources. Bravo to your courage in giving us the truth in light of adversity. Bravo, indeed.
 
Pablo Sanchez

____________________________________

RE: The Coming "War" Between the Obama Administration and the Catholic Church
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111908.html
 
Dear editor,

I just read this article and it is very disturbing to me because the outcome of this election was unquestionably in the hands of the Catholic voters. And the Catholic voters' voting decisions were in the hands of their educators - our priests, pastors, bishops, cardinals, and other religious throughout the USA.
 
Back in January I sent a desperate email to the Vatican begging them to advise all USA clergy that it is their duty and obligation as our religious leaders of the Catholic Church to educate Catholics in the USA on their voting obligations to vote pro-life.  I never heard a reply back but that did not matter to me; I was hoping that the seriousness of the voting issue in the USA had been addressed behind the scenes.
 
Over the summer and early fall I realized this had not been the case at all and an alarming number of Catholics were considering voting for the pro-choice candidate.
 
Priests and all Catholic Church leaders' primary obligation is to educate their members regarding their moral obligation as Catholics to vote for the candidate who is pro life. Throughout this past 9 months, they not only did not educate Catholics on their moral obligation to vote for the pro-life candidate, but even worse, they presented the voting decision to Catholics as open to individual desires and needs.

Catholics were not repeatedly told by their leaders that no other issue is more important than the 45 million abortions a year! Many religious leaders and influential members of religious orders voted for the pro-choice candidate because other issues were more important to them than the issue of life. In the final days leading up to the elections, it was clear that approximately 60% of all Catholics were voting for the pro-choice candidate.
 
Personally, I am shocked and sad to the point where no words can describe. How can we, the ones who weekly and, sometimes daily, receive the living Body and Blood of our Savior, Jesus Christ, vote for a candidate who is pro-choice, for someone who clearly has no compassion for the most vulnerable in the world - the unborn? How can many of our Catholic Church leaders not recognize the profound importance of the abortion issue and not instruct their members?
 
Now, the Catholic Church is in an uproar over what Obama will do regarding abortion, and yet they did very little in the days leading up to the elections. I just hope and pray that over the next four years our leaders make radical "changes in educating Catholic voters" on their moral obligation to vote pro-life. If they fulfill this primary obligation on their part, in four years Obama or any other pro-choice candidate will not be re-elected - neither on the national nor on the local levels.
 
God have Mercy on our country. I have pity on all the proud "pro-choice" Catholic voters who think they have "won" in this election. For in their next life, they will be face to face with their Creator and the "choice" of their eternal life will be in His hands. Voting for a pro-choice candidate is, in essence, condoning abortion. Abortion is the greatest evil in our world today.
 
Thank you for your time.
 
B Maria Szele
____________________________________
 
To write a letter to the Editor: E-mail your letter to . Write "letter to the editor" in the subject line. Include your name, city and province or state of residence, as well as your phone # (the phone # is for our use only, and will not be published). Please note that all letters are subject to editing. LifeSiteNews.com will publish letters to the editor at its discretion, giving priority to the most concise, insightful and timely submissions.

---

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.