Saturday, September 25, 2004


Powerful words from Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi.

Cardinal Ratzinger has recently reiterated clearly the teaching of Pope John Paul II and his predecessors that Catholics must give the highest moral priority to respecting the sanctity of human life. All other social issues, such as poverty, hunger, sickness, economic injustices, etc., pale in significance when compared with protecting innocent human life. That there are Catholics tainted with the heresy that ‘choice’ is of greater importance than protecting innocent human life is obvious to any observer of the contemporary scene.

The vast majority of Catholics, however, indicate in poll after poll that they are pro-life and have resisted the propaganda of those who promote the heresy which denies the sanctity of human life. Here is reason for hope. Here is reason to be optimistic. The sensus fidelium of the majority of Catholics is strong and is growing stronger with each passing year. Each year in which we witness the holocaust of innocent victims the lessons of the Fourth Century give us additional reasons to be hopeful.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

"protecting innocent human life" is the highest priority...

I agree, that is why I can NOT vote for a President who is okay with innocent bystanders in Iraq being killed (including children and pregnant women) for a war that did NOT result in the increase of safety of any Americans.

A war monger is NOT a man of god...

4:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

May I remind you that there is no such thing as a "pro-abortion" person. There is only Pro Life and Choice. Since Roe v. Wade REpublicans have reduced the abortion totals per year. They have destroyed welfare for mothers who are on the roles and pregnant. It is apparent to me that they are not humane or compassionate. Kerry will fight to reduce abortion. Kerry will fight to provide women with real options (adoption, social welfare, social security, deadbeat dad protection, safe havens for infants. Kerry is the best pro-life candidate we have... As for George W., human rights does not stop at birth... He's got lots of other things to work on..

6:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Answer this then:
Is it always wrong to vote for someone who would legalize a serious intrinsic evil, such as slavery? Suppose the pro-slavery candidate had a good health care policy or a good proposal for increasing employment, would those considerations outweigh his or her pro-slavery stance? Suppose a pro-life candidate was waging a war one thought to be unjust or was not working hard enough to ensure good health care or civil rights. Similarly, suppose one thought the pro-abortion candidate had stronger pro-life stances in areas other than abortion. The proportion surely tilts toward protection of the life of unborn persons, not other issues. Those who are enslaved certainly have a greater interest in freedom than in health care; those who are in the womb have a greater interest in continuing to live than to possess a health care plan.

Finally, what in 30 yrs are specific things that John Kerry has done that has reduced abortion?

You have to be alive to be eligible for social justice programs.

10:58 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home