LINK to Article in THE TOWER by Ryan Reilly:
CUA Tower – University Approves Sen Kerry to Speak
Allowing Senator Kerry a forum to speak at Catholic University, like its capitulation to the NAACP for a student branch on campus, is another retreat by the school from its pro-life line in the sand against the culture of death. The NAACP supported the so-called women’s march and now officially espouses the crime of abortion as a civil right. In other words, they support their own black genocide. Indeed, given the wholesale ownership of the democrat party by the likes of Planned Parenthood and NARAL, the sponsoring student organization for Kerry’s talk is itself problematical for its support of depraved pro-abortion and pro-homosexual politicians. Saying that Kerry can speak as long as he reserves himself to the environment and the Iraq war while avoiding issues like abortion, is itself an acceptance of the premise that there is a grocery list of values from which one can pick and choose. The trouble is that Kerry, along with certain other elected officials, has repudiated in writing papal authority and Church teaching, and is an active enabler for those policies that most threaten human decency and children’s lives. The Iraq war is important. As of this writing, we have lost 3,739 Americans in years of fighting. But we kill as many as 4,000 unborn children a day in the U.S. The environment is important. By why is it that we prize trees or seals or whales more than an unborn child? Even if Kerry sidesteps the more problematical issues, his chief political opponents are pro-lifers. Kerry does not have to mention the matter of abortion; he has become an icon or symbol for the dissenting Catholic and for the pro-abortion cause.
Given Senator Kerry’s precarious marriage situation, reception of Holy Communion in Episcopal churches on Sunday (along with assertions of religious relativism), and his rejection of the Gospel of Life; it is ludicrous for THE TOWER article to refer to him as “a practicing Catholic”. He is a bad Catholic on many levels and he regularly offers public scandal. I reject his use of deceptive language when he minimizes the inherent natural right to life as merely a parochial “article of faith”. In any case, what the faith does say about the matter, he rejects; claiming otherwise, is an utterly transparent lie. Matters of faith are not simply things to memorize. They call forth from the believer a response. His response has been to endorse and to expand abortion on demand and partial birth infanticide.
Mark Arnone, chairman of the College Democrats, appealed the initial rejection of Kerry with a six-page analysis. It was nothing other than a corrupted variation of the seamless garment argument. He highlighted Kerry’s work for affordable healthcare (which would include abortion and artificial contraception), minimum wage reform (it is easy to be generous when you marry money), defending the environment (exempting any exploitation from his wife’s business, their properties and investments), etc. It only takes one sentence to invalidate his argument: what is not acknowledged is that when it comes to the poorest of the poor and the most “marginalized” he champions not the unborn child but an abortion industry that has grown fat and rich at the cost of innocent blood. A good deal of this money has found its way into his past campaign coffers.
Bill Jonas, the director of UCSPE, says we have to find balance; however, why is this the case? Why should a Catholic institution give such dangerous men a forum to speak? Are there not enough secular avenues for their voices to be heard? If this was WWII Germany and Adolf Hitler, who never personally gassed anyone, was asked by the campus Nazi party to speak at the university, would we allow him to do so? What if he promised not to speak about the holocaust and the Jews, but merely about the environment and the war to reunite Germany, would this be okay? Can any balance be found with those who advocate or promote or legislate the murder of innocent human beings? The only difference is that we prize the lives of people outside the womb more highly than those still hidden within. Arnone states: “…yes this man doesn’t agree with us on every single issue, but because his words carry value we want our students to get some enrichment from this man, [because] he has served in the Senate and has so much experience.” I recall similar things were once argued for white supremacists who promoted brutal segregation and who turned a blind eye to lynching! Given the heinous evil with which we are dealing, why should we suppose that Kerry’s other ideas would not be contaminated or poisoned?
The article in THE TOWER makes much of Kerry trying to find a middle-ground or partnership between the “anti-abortion” and “pro-abortion” camps. Notice that the article by Ryan Reilly says “anti-abortion” and not PRO-LIFE, a possible quick giveaway where his sympathies rest since he favors the Planned Parenthood and NARAL label for pro-lifers! Kerry’s so-called effort was merely a slight-of-hand or parlor trick. While we certainly want to lessen abortions, the true pro-life champion will never turn his back on even one unborn child. Utilitarian answers will not suffice. There are no expendable or disposable people. There can be no lasting compromise or partnership with the devil that would violate the truth that all human life is precious and incommensurate.
This business with Kerry opens a door that may prove very hard to shut. Other invitations are pending. The campus democrats have other dominoes they hope will fall quickly into place:
Sen. Charles Schumer – He claims to be opposed to abortion but he tries to play both sides. He supports federal funding for stem-cell research (which is analogous to abortion), universal healthcare (which would no doubt include abortion coverage), and “family planning” and “comprehensive reproductive healthcare” which is just jargon for contraception and abortion.
Gov. Martin O’Malley – He has taken a strong pro-abortion stand and pledged back when he was Baltimore mayor to veto any attempt to erode pro-abortion laws. He would not even accept any measures for parental notification in cases where minors sought abortions. He also accepts embryonic stem-cell research.
Rep. Jane Harman – She has fought for the pro-abortion cause even before Roe versus Wade! She has a 100% pro-abortion voting record and has vigorously fought the pro-life movement at every step. She is the major player to give free abortions to military women at military hospitals. She also wants to include abortion and contraception in the health insurance plans for federal employees. She supports embryonic stem-cell research and partial birth infanticide.
It is interesting and tragic that the campus democrats had no one on their short list of invitations who was truly and unashamedly pro-life.