Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

, ,

Opinion: Development and Peace deceives its members—again

Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

May 26, 2011 ( - The Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (D&P) has issued yet another deceptive letter to its members, in an awkward attempt at damage control following its recent fiasco in Ottawa, where Archbishop Terrence Prendergast last month canceled a speaking engagement by one of D&P’s many pro-abortion grant beneficiaries. Following LifeSiteNews’ exposé on the scandal, the story has been picked up by numerous other publications, magnifying the troubled organization’s embarrassment.

The problem, of course, is that D&P has spent more than two years falsely denying that it has pro-abortion grant beneficiaries, despite the overwhelming evidence published by LifeSiteNews (LSN) , the blog SoCon or Bust, the National Catholic Register and other sources. So what to do now that it is caught red-handed trying to foist a speaker from one of its pro-abortion partners on the Archdiocese of Ottawa, with the Archbishop himself asked to give the opening address?  Will the organization come clean, fess up, and reform? Sadly, the answer yet again is: no.

In its latest missive, D&P thanks the reader “for writing to us with your message of support and concern following the cancellation of the visit of Father Arriaga, s.j., Executive Director of the Centre PRODH in Mexico (...) We are touched by your expression of solidarity…”

The letter then goes on to blatantly fudge the facts: “The work of PRODH is to defend cases where there have been violations of human rights, abuses of power and political repression, and injustice. Their work is not related to women’s reproductive health, abortion or contraception. However, because of certain recent allegations made against the Centre, the Bishops of Mexico raised questions concerning the Centre’s involvement in networks with other civil society organizations”

Although it is true that PRODH’s focus is not the advocacy of abortion “rights,” the organization itself has been clearly and directly involved in advocacy in favor of the pro-abortion cause, as LifeSiteNews has meticulously documented over the last two years.  LSN has even shown its readers a full page newspaper ad signed by PRODH and displayed in the Guadalajaran newspaper Publico, objecting against a state pro-life amendment. We have also published a translation of the same document in English.

In addition, PRODH has repeatedly signed other “human rights” statements that endorse or advocate the legalization or decriminalization of abortion, all of which LSN has published. Despite protests to the contrary, PRODH was not merely a “contributor” to these odious documents.  It always endorsed the statements clearly, and in one case even signed at the highest level of endorsement: as a “presenter.” Clearly, the work of PRODH more than “related” to abortion. It is a pro-abortion organization.

More deception

D&P acknowledges that it will not be funding PRODH any longer—now that the Mexican bishops themselves have expressed their “concerns” about the group, and Archbishop Prendergast has canceled its leader’s speaking engagement, there is not much more it can do. But it goes on to further mislead its members by suggesting that PRODH and other pro-abortion groups funded by D&P are only guilty of being in coalitions that include pro-abortion groups, rather than direct involvement in such advocacy.

“The case of the Centre PRODH raises the important question of working in networks and coalitions in the areas of social justice advocacy. To properly defend human rights or to bring about meaningful changes in society in the Global South and in Canada, it is often necessary to join forces and efforts with groups who share in the same objectives. These groups may not necessarily be Church-based or even Catholic, however, the strength and credibility of these networks derives from the diversity of the voices expressing themselves on a common issue. Despite their differences, they are struggling for an ideal or principle that will enshrine a higher level of human dignity.”

If PRODH and the other organizations exposed by LSN were only members of coalitions that include pro-abortion groups, there would be much less basis for objecting to their funding.  However, this is not at all the case. During its coverage of the ongoing D&P scandal, LSN has uncovered dozens of groups funded by the organization that directly, personally advocate the legalization or decriminalization of abortion, the use and distribution of contraceptives, and the homosexual political agenda, and even seek to remove the Vatican’s diplomatic status at the United Nations.  None of these groups was merely involved in a coalition that included pro-abortion groups, fighting for some legitimate cause.

PRODH is a case in point.  Besides its direct involvement with abortion “rights” advocacy, the group is a member of the All Rights for Everyone Network (“Red Todos los Derechos para Todas y Todos”). This network doesn’t only include pro-abortion groups—it directly advocates the legalization of abortion throughout Mexico, and promoted and defended Mexico City’s law which legalizes and even subsidizes abortion on demand for the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. PRODH directly supports its work and its name even appears on pro-abortion documents it issues.

The All Rights for Everyone Network is itself a D&P grant recipient. Despite LSN’s exposés proving its heavy and direct involvement in abortion advocacy, D&P has never indicated that it has cut its funding of the group.

By continuing to distort and mischaracterize the evidence regarding its grant partners, D&P is giving every indication to Canadian Catholics that it is unrepentant for its support of pro-abortion organizations in Mexico, Latin America, and worldwide. It appears that only a radical, thorough, and top-down reform of the organization is likely to bring it into conformity with Catholic principles, as mandated in Pope Benedict’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate

Share this article

Featured Image
John Jalsevac John Jalsevac Follow John

BREAKING: Planned Parenthood shooting suspect surrenders, is in custody: police

John Jalsevac John Jalsevac Follow John
By John Jalsevac

Nov. 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) - Five hours after a single male shooter reportedly opened fire at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood, chatter on police radio is indicating that the suspect has now been "detained."

"We have our suspect and he says he is alone," said police on the police radio channel. 

Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers also confirmed via Twitter shortly after 7:00 pm EST that the suspect was in custody.

The news comes almost exactly an hour after the start of a 6:00 pm. press conference in which Lt. Catherine Buckley had confirmed that a single shooter was still at large, and had exchanged gunfire with police moments before.

According to Lt. Buckley, four, and possibly five police officers have been shot since the first 911 call was received at 11:38 am local time today. An unknown number of civilians have also been shot.

Although initial reports had suggested that the shooting began outside the Planned Parenthood, possibly outside a nearby bank, Lt. Buckley said that in fact the incident began at the Planned Parenthood itself.

She said that the suspect had also brought unknown "items" with him to the Planned Parenthood. 

Pro-life groups have started responding to the news, urging caution in jumping to conclusions about the motivations of the shooter, while also condemning the use of violence in promoting the pro-life cause. 

"Information is very sketchy about the currently active shooting situation in Colorado Springs," said Pavone. "The Planned Parenthood was the address given in the initial call to the police, but we still do not know what connection, if any, the shooting has to do with Planned Parenthood or abortion.

"As leaders in the pro-life movement, we call for calm and pray for a peaceful resolution of this situation."

Troy Newman of Operation Rescue and Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, also issued statements.

"Operation Rescue unequivocally deplores and denounces all violence at abortion clinics and has a long history of working through peaceful channels to advocate on behalf of women and their babies," said Newman. "We express deep concern for everyone involved and are praying for the safety of those at the Planned Parenthood office and for law enforcement personnel. We pray this tragic situation can be quickly resolved without further injury to anyone."

"Although we don't know the reasons for the shooting near the Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs today, the pro-life movement is praying for the safety of all involved and as a movement we have always unequivocally condemned all forms of violence at abortion clinics. We must continually as a nation stand against violence on all levels," said Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, based in Washington, D.C.


Share this article

Featured Image
Wikimedia Commons
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , , ,

Rubio says SCOTUS didn’t ‘settle’ marriage issue: ‘God’s rules always win’

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- Surging GOP presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, R-FL, says that "God's law" trumps the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision imposing same-sex “marriage” nationwide.

The senator also told Christian Broadcast Network's David Brody that the Supreme Court's redefinition of marriage is not "settled," but instead "current law."

“No law is settled,” said Rubio. “Roe v. Wade is current law, but it doesn’t mean that we don’t continue to aspire to fix it, because we think it’s wrong.”

“If you live in a society where the government creates an avenue and a way for you to peacefully change the law, then you’re called to participate in that process to try to change it,” he explained, and "the proper place for that to be defined is at the state level, where marriage has always been regulated — not by the Supreme Court and not by the federal government.”

However, when laws conflict with religious beliefs, "God's rules always win," said Rubio.

“In essence, if we are ever ordered by a government authority to personally violate and sin — violate God’s law and sin — if we’re ordered to stop preaching the Gospel, if we’re ordered to perform a same-sex marriage as someone presiding over it, we are called to ignore that,” Rubio expounded. “We cannot abide by that because government is compelling us to sin.”

“I continue to believe that marriage law should be between one man and one woman," said the senator, who earlier in the fall was backed by billionaire GOP donor and same-sex "marriage" supporter Paul Singer.

Singer, who also backs looser immigration laws and a strong U.S.-Israel alliance, has long pushed for the GOP to change its position on marriage in part due to the sexual orientation of his son.

Despite Singer's support, Rubio's marriage stance has largely been consistent. He told Brody earlier in the year that "there isn't such a right" to same-sex "marriage."

"You have to have a ridiculous reading of the U.S. Constitution to reach the conclusion that people have a right to marry someone of the same sex."

Rubio also said religious liberty should be defended against LGBT activists he says "want to stigmatize, they want to ostracize anyone who disagrees with them as haters."

"I believe, as do a significant percentage of Americans, that the institution of marriage, an institution that existed before government, that existed before laws, that institution should remain in our laws recognized as the union of one man and one woman," he said.

Rubio also hired social conservative leader Eric Teetsel as his director of faith outreach this month.

However, things have not been entirely smooth for Rubio on marriage. Social conservatives were concerned when the executive director of the LGBT-focused Log Cabin Republicans told Reuters in the spring that the Catholic senator is "not as adamantly opposed to all things LGBT as some of his statements suggest."

The LGBT activist group had meetings with Rubio's office "going back some time," though the senator himself never attended those meetings. Rubio has publicly said that he would attend the homosexual "wedding" of a gay loved one, and also that he believed "that sexual preference is something that people are born with," as opposed to being a choice.

Additionally, days after the Supreme Court redefined marriage, Rubio said that he disagreed with the decision but that "we live in a republic and must abide by the law."

"I believe that marriage, as the key to strong family life, is the most important institution in our society and should be between one man and one woman," he said. "People who disagree with the traditional definition of marriage have the right to change their state laws. That is the right of our people, not the right of the unelected judges or justices of the Supreme Court. This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years.

Rubio also said at the time that "it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood…"

“I firmly believe the question of same sex marriage is a question of the definition of an institution, not the dignity of a human being. Every American has the right to pursue happiness as they see fit. Not every American has to agree on every issue, but all of us do have to share our country. A large number of Americans will continue to believe in traditional marriage, and a large number of Americans will be pleased with the Court’s decision today. In the years ahead, it is my hope that each side will respect the dignity of the other.”

The Florida senator said in July that he opposed a constitutional marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution to leave marriage up to the states because that would involve the federal government in state marriage policies.

Featured Image
Former The View star Sherri Shepherd and then-husband Lamar Sally in 2010 s_bukley /
Steve Weatherbe

Court orders Sherri Shepherd to pay child support for surrogate son she abandoned

Steve Weatherbe
By Steve Weatherbe

November 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- Sherri Shepherd, a Hollywood celebrity who co-hosted the popular talk show The View for seven years, has lost a maternity suit launched by her ex-husband Lamar Sally, forcing her to pay him alimony and child support for their one-year surrogate son LJ. The decision follows an unseemly fight which pro-life blogger Cassy Fiano says has exposed how surrogacy results in “commodifying” the unborn.

Shepherd, a co-host of the View from 2007 to 2014, met Sally, a screenwriter, in 2010 and they married a year later. Because her eggs were not viable, they arranged a surrogate mother in Pennsylvania to bear them a baby conceived in vitro using Sally’s sperm and a donated egg.

But the marriage soured in mid-term about the time Shepherd lost her job with The View. According to one tabloid explanation, she was worried he would contribute little to parenting responsibilities.  Sally filed for separation in 2014, Shepherd filed for divorce a few days, then Sally sued for sole custody, then alimony and child support.

Earlier this year she told PEOPLE she had gone along with the surrogacy to prevent the breakup of the marriage and had not really wanted the child.

Shepherd, an avowed Christian who once denied evolution on The View and a successful comic actor on Broadway, TV, and in film since the mid-90s, didn’t want anything to do with LJ, as Lamar named the boy, who after all carried none of her genes. She refused to be at bedside for the birth, and refused to let her name be put on the birth certificate and to shoulder any responsibility for LJ’s support.

But in April the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, and now the state’s Superior Court, ruled that Shepherd’s name must go on the birth certificate and she must pay Sally alimony and child support.

“The ultimate outcome is that this baby has two parents and the parents are Lamar Sally and Sherri Shepherd,” Shepherd’s lawyer Tiffany Palmer said.

As for the father, Sally told PEOPLE, “I'm glad it's finally over. I'm glad the judges saw through all the lies that she put out there, and the negative media attention. If she won't be there for L.J. emotionally, I'll be parent enough for the both of us.”

But Shepherd said, “I am appealing the ruling that happened,” though in the meantime, Sally will “get his settlement every month. There’s nothing I can do.”

Commented Fiano in Live Action News, “What’s so sickening about this case is that this little boy, whose life was created in a test tube, was treated as nothing more than a commodity…Saying that you don’t want a baby but will engineer one to get something you want is horrific.” As for trying to get out from child support payments now that the marriage had failed, that was “despicable.”

Fiano went on to characterize the Shepherd-Sally affair as a “notable example” of commodification of children, and “by no means an anomaly.” She cited a British report than over the past five years 123 babies conceived in vitro were callously aborted when they turned out to have Down Syndrome.

“When we’re not ready for babies, we have an abortion,” she added. “But then when we decide we are ready we manufacture them in a laboratory and destroy any extras. Children exist when we want them to exist, to fill the holes in us that we want them to fill, instead of being independent lives with their own inherent value and dignity.”

Share this article


Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook