Redefining the term 'pro-life'

Was "Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good" opposed to Notre Dame University conferring an honorary degree upon President Barack Hussein Obama?

You cannot stand Bush, can you? Any reason is good to slam him. And you are not very eloquent about it...
In the meantime the party you favor, because they "better on anti-poverty initiatives and protecting vital social safety nets", kicks out kids from private schools and sends them to failing public schools in DC. Is this how the democrats are better when it comes to caring for the poor?

Thanks John, you have stated it well.
Compassion and understanding within the Catholic Church has clearly given way to rigid militancy especially on the question of abortion . This issue is debated endlessly without the Christ-like compassion and understanding it deserves. Abortion is not just about an aborted foetus, a life can just as easily be prematurely 'aborted' due to the lack of funds. Surely, Pro-Life includes ensuring that we don't 'abort' life giving support to the aged, the handicapped, the sick and homeless who can't afford health care otherwise. Abortion is an issue that must involve all forms of life from the Alpha to the Omega. This might be a good time to reflect on the wisdom of Solomon, 1 Kings 3:16-28.

Yeah, right, Bush=pro-life...sad, sad, sad!!!

Thank you. Can we get this message out. I weary of people who are one issue voters, who only talk about abortion.

The fact is that, despite rhetoric to the contrary, "pro-life" has never been anything but a cleverly framed synonym for "anti-abortion/anti-euthanasia". As for the Church's much-vaunted "social teaching", most of it seems to me to be little more than window dressing. The hierarchy is ready to go to the wall over the "life issues" but, apart from some immigration issues, seems to offer little except lip service in behalf of the rest of the "social teaching" agenda.

Bravo. My thinking exactly, but put in a beautifully crafted commentary by John Gehring. Somehow this point of view has not made its way into the mainstream. the media often paints any pro-life view as coming from Christian extremist right-wingers. We need to find a way to get the message to the media, as well. The pro-life message ad scheduled for Superbowl Sunday has prompted screaming messages to fill my email inbox ("Emily's List" being one) proclaiming "right wing Christian pro-life extremists have highjacked the Superbowl." How could one message for life prompt such outrage and name-calling? We have much work to do to crawl out of "right wing extremist" corner the media has put us in.....

Pro life also should cover innocents killed in war. People who are not safe or have enough food. What about a job that pays a living wage, access to education or health care, including pre and post natal care. Maybe a key is a willingness to be socially responsible.

I fail to see the number of people, U.S., British, & Iraqi, in Iraq as "pro-life"...

Of course the abortion rate for those in poverty is high, as it the rate for minorities. Planned Parenthood sets up shop in poor and black neighborhoods. Their entire reason for being is to rid the world of the poor, the sick, and especially racial minorities. They cater to them, direct their business to them, and seek government funding so that a black woman can kill her baby for free. The ironic thing is that most black elected leaders have fallen under their spell and actively seek out funds to kill black children.

John Gehring should think a bit about what he would do if a bit of heavy arm twisting was required to get information from a terrorist who had captured his whole family and was then captured himself. Would he just read him his rights or would he stretch the limits a bit and try to force information from him..Has John talked to some of the families of the 3,000 who died in the twin towers? I have nine children and 32 grandchildren and my pro life actions have caused sacrifice. Five of the children have their masters degrees and one has a doctorate. One has gone to Honduras five years in a row to start an orphanage for boys off the streets and this year he will begin another in the Dominican Republic. I think one can be strongly pro life and still take a firm stand against the Muslim terrorist and not just handle them with kid gloves.

Excellent! The points made speak to me about the need for the Church to do the work of challenging us all be more energized by the beauty and creativity of human life and love rather than by reaction to what is legal or illegal. Some people will choose to live their lives according to what is legal or illegal. However, we believe that most people can do much more than that. So when we put time and energy into trying to change a law or into changing others' minds in relation to it, we give the law power and are less focused on the power unleashed by the experience of a Love that is meant to be driving us. We are called to help ourselves and others to focus on the power and presence of God's love poured forth into human hearts. Then we will be healing the root causes of poor choices and spreading the news about what we are FOR and not just what we are AGAINST.

Here's the thing: I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-life, in the truest sense of that word - which most pro-lifers use simply to mean that they are opposed to abortion and choice.

I am not "in favor" of abortion any more than I am in favor of the death penalty.

Last time I checked, both were still legal. I'm not saying that this is your position, but it's always fascinating to me that the most ardent opposition to abortion often comes from the most enthusiastic supporters of the death penalty.

I'm also fascinated that the very ones who want "government off our backs" are often the ones who support laws to restrict the rights which pertain to a woman's body.

Ironies abound!

I am pro-life because in over twenty years of professional ordained ministry and more years than I care to admit as a health professional, I have never - not once - advised a woman to have an abortion.

Because I am pro-life, I have never - not once - advised a woman to not have an abortion.

Because I am pro-life, I have always worked with a woman - and the father of the child and her family, if they were / could be involved - to make the best decision for them.

I am pro-life because I am not in favor of abortion unless it has been determined by the woman, in consultation with her physician, the father of the child, her family and clergy that there is no other choice; that it is a medical or financial or social necessity and not just a whim.

And, what if there were other choices? What if it was a decision borne of fear or confusion which were never properly addressed with professional or family or clerical assistance - or even on a whim?

Well, because I am pro-life, I deeply, deeply grieve that decision, and not because "a life" has been taken. I have worked with many women - even those for whom abortion was the most difficult, painful decision of their lives, and I can tell you that they grieve, too. I have also worked with many, many women who have placed their child for adoption, and I can tell you that they grieve just as hard and as long about that decision, as well.

They, and I, grieve not because of the loss of "a life" but the loss of potential. The loss of what might / could / should have been. We grieve because there is nothing like making that kind of decision to put you in direct touch and find yourself before the Creator of all Life, all Hope, all Potential and it is deeply, profoundly humbling.

Even so, because I am pro-life, I would support with my very life the right of the woman to do what she feels is right in her heart and mind. My job is to help her find that right path, not determine it for her.

Ultimately, her decision - one way or another - will be judged by God. That's awesome enough. She doesn't need my judgment or any one else's. She needs our compassion and forgiveness - in the very same way that young, underage teens like Bristol Palin who choose to proceed with the pregnancy, get married and become children who raise children. These kids too soon discover that parenting is not babysitting. No one pays you for it and, after a few hours, you get to go home and listen to your iPod, talk on the phone or IM your posse.

We all know that the majority of young teenage girls do not get the support they need to raise healthy, whole children, which is why so many young girls - many of whom are disproportionately young girls of color - have little choice but abortion.

It also speaks directly to the terrorism in our home land known as domestic violence, including the physical and sexual abuse of children.

The pro-life democratic platform on abortion - carefully crafted by Evangelicals, Roman Catholics and Mainline Protestant men and women on both sides of the issue - seeks to reduce by 70 -80% of the abortions performed in this country by directing their efforts at the reasons so many women seek abortion - poverty, lack of access to good health care, poor or no education, lack of social support services, lack of awareness of options to prevent pregnancy, including abstinence and other birth control / prevention measures.

Because I am pro-life, I support this platform which recognizes that abortions have been performed for almost as long as people have been having sexual intercourse and that abortions will continue to be performed - legally or illegally, often at the risk of the life of the woman - but it does not take away the rights of an individual in order to appease the moral outrage of a particular group.

I am pro-life because I trust the life of the woman to determine what is best for her life. You may disagree, and that is completely your prerogative, but the fact of the matter is that abortion has been made legal because it has been determined by the medical definition of when "life" begins.

It is intelligence blinded by arrogance to place one's "feeling" or "sense" or "belief" about when life begins up against that of the knowledge of trained physicians and scientists. You have a complete right to your feelings, senses and beliefs, but you have no right to impose that on the facts of the matter.

I am pro-life because I recognize that we live in a pluralistic culture and that my religion, my understanding of God is not the only one in the global village of America. There are other religious bodies who support abortion - many under the same circumstances as articulated in the position of TEC.

You may even have a feeling, sense or belief about what God feels about abortion, but you have no right to impose that on anyone else. This is still a democracy, not a theocracy. Can you say, "Iran"? Or, "Iraq"?

"The singular focus on abortion as the arbiter of what it means to be "pro-life" has also severely narrowed our national discourse about moral values in the public square."
AMEN!

It is about time that those identifying themselves as "pro-life" are held accountable for beliefs other than the sin of abortion. War, executions,and social neglect are all mortal sins against life.

H.G. Bishop TIMOTHY MacLam
Pilgrim Prayer & Healing Ministries

If we are to believe that the man on the street is angry with the political chaos in Washington and its inability to get things done, I suspect that there are many believers in and absent from the pews who are disgusted with the Catholic hierarchical politicization of the Abortion issue. We are told that we are not a single issue church, but you could not prove that by me. In this state the Catholic conference is comprised of 8 dioceses facing a multitude of challenges that could use a strong united voice by the bishops on health care, services to the poor, protection of the immigrant, etc, but no topic is allowed at meetings except that which meets from the narrow pro=life definition - rather than one of a consistent ethic of life. It will be worth the wait to watch for the judgment of history on whether this era of US Catholicism committed a colossal blunder in demonizing a president who hold Catholic Social teaching in higher regard than its leaders, with the exception of Abortion.

Some say the hierarchy are out of touch with present day realities; I say they're out of touch with the gospel of Jesus.

John - thank you. I have been writing the same thing to my local newspapers and bishop for many years. It does no good.

Let's face the cold hard truth. Nothing will happen to change this single (really about 3 issues all rolled into one) issue mentality until the bishops tell the people that they may 'think' differently .... especially when too many 'like' hating immigrants, frying some poor guy, dropping bombs on children, etc.

Over the past 10-20 years or so many bishops have basically ignored Popes concerning 'social justice' or even starting the Iraq War. Why should I have any hope that they would pay any attention to a 'layperson?'

(Sorry to be discouraged/yes, even bitter but I see no reason to Hope for change.)

My question: How are you/me/we going to communicate with our bishops in a way that we are actually heard?

I guess you can be "pro-life" even though declaring war, killing thousands (mostly innocent) lives. Shameful.

It makes me laugh. Seriously how could you even for one second call
George W. Bush prolife??????? He is a murderer both of the people of
Iraq and the young men and women who were killed there. How can you
execute people and be called pro life?????

There are other issues that need to be discussed if we are discussing pro-life - as in anti-abortion. Will that unwanted child get good prenatal care? What happens to the unwanted child when she or he is born, rather than being aborted? Yes, that child "could" be adopted, but usually is not. Will that child suffer abuse after it is born? I suspect that many times the answer is yes. Who is to decide which abuse is worse - ending the life of an unborn child or allowing the child to be born, only to suffer abuse for years, or maybe an entire lifetime. That leads to questions about social services, foster care, equal healthcare - including mental health treatment - no matter your economic level, equal education (and the radical inequality of education for the urban poor in most cities), and much more. In a perfect world, I do believe that abortion should not be allowed. But we do not live in a perfect world. And it seems that most of the folks who speak the loudest on the pro-life side never mention anything about the real life of the child who is unwanted and not aborted.

I do agree with the writer, that pro-life must refer to more than anti-abortion. It must refer to issues of life from womb to tomb. This includes care for the elderly - and once again, economics play a large roll. If the elderly person has the money to pay for what they need - great. And we cannot assume that the elderly poor just never worked much during their working lives. Chances are they worked very hard, but just never got paid fairly for their work. So now they often live in substandard housing or less than ideal nursing homes, with less than ideal in home or nursing home medical care provided by folks making little more than minimum wage, and with little training.

As with so many issues, pro-life and how we define it8 may come down to money, who has it and who doesn't.

Bush getting a pro-life award? What a joke! He was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths with his pre-emptive war. To emphasize embryonic stem cell research and abortion makes the Catholic viewpoint absurd. Why didn't the bishops ban Communion from politicians who voted for the war?

Personally, I do not believe in banning Communion no matter the reason. However, if that is how they attempt to enforce their view, so be it.

Catholic Democrats love to use the "seamless Garment" argument to blast Republican politicians especially George Bush. Rarely do I see them criticizing one of their own or fighting against Roe vs. Wade, which has done more to militate against Catholic family life for the poor than any measures proposed by Republicans to limit welfare.

Where is the policy encouraging young men to stand by the women who they get pregnant? I don't see any policies issuing forth from the Democratic part encouraging responsible behavior for both men and women.

Also, who gave more to AIDS in Africa than George W. Bush? It will be generations before we know the whole story behind the the reasons for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan -- just as it has taken generations to vinidicate that Democratic hero Harry Truman.

As for Capital punishment -- the number of lives that are taken by Capital punishment is miniscule compared to the 45 million plus abortions that have taken place in American -- which is innocent life.

I'm sorry, but imperfect as George Bush is, he is more deserving than the Nancy Pelosis and Ted Kennedys that I see betraying life and their Catholic background.

The folks in Legatus must be cafeteria Catholics (chosing or agreeing on some "pro-life" issues dear to Bush but letting other pro-life issues slide [like the death penalty]) if they choose to give a pro-life award to Bush. A wager: non of our Repiblican bishops will make a peep about this.

I keep searching online for an actual plan to end abortion in the United States. The National Right to life Committee finally gets to an articulation that they are working to restore legal rights to the unborn. OK, but how? (How about a clear mission statement instead of a list of accomplishments?)

What is the plan?

All the rhetoric and confusion about what pro-life means and the mean-spirited debate - what is it all about?

If there is a plan to restore rights to the unborn, where is it?

Who, what, when, where, and how? The why we know which is probably where the common ground stops.

A goal without a plan is just a wish.

Can we stop sputtering and come up with an integrated plan for life?

Catholicism in the USA certainly is a 'single issue' faith. Despite the rhetoric about stem cell research, wars, the death penalty, etc., the only issue the bishops and conservatives get excited over is abortion. Do you ever hear anyone say Catholic politicians that voted for the war in Iraq should be denied communion? Of course not. Tha's the sad reality of being 'pro life'

Legatus is obviously a fraud, clearly just a right-wing political organization. Bush is directly responsible for the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children in his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he did his best to kill the envrionment. He is a killer, period. These folks may call themselves Catholic, but they surely aren't Christian.

THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET -- John Gehring writes: "The abortion rate for women living in poverty is more than four times higher than for those earning 300 percent above the poverty line." That's sad. But how many people know the dirty little secret that, from its inception, the Abortion Movement targeted the Blacks and minorities to curb their prolific fertility. Many have contended that Margaret Sanger, founder of the American Birth Control League (which eventually became Planned Parenthood, was a racist. They attribute her "efforts to promote birth control to a desire to 'purify' the human race through eugenics, and even to eliminate minority races by placing birth control clinics in minority neighborhoods" (see Wikepedia under Margaret Sanger).

Excellent article. The question still lingers as to why pro-lifers oppose abortion -- as I do -- but believe it is okay to send young men and women to die in unwinnable wars. Or why should billions be spent on those same wars when such monies could put food on the tables, roofs over the heads, education in the minds, or health in the bodies of millions?

Why does not George W. Bush receive the war award, the death-penalty award and the anti-social-security award?

Thank you for a clear and real statement of how things are. Perhaps a new generation can carry on a more open dialogue with respect for all concerned, women and their own moral authority, as well as all others concerned this decision.

Thank you, thank you, thank you,
Last night there was a feeble attempt to explore the abortion issue on Bill Moyers Journal.They stayed close to the old lines in the sand however and did not touch the very real points about which you speak. Thank you for writing this.

I do think one reason abortion has become the single issue is that no other aspect of Catholic social teaching, whether that be subsidiarity, caring for the poor, a just wage, etc. can even come into play unless a person is allowed to live. First we have to help society recognize the evil of murdering an unborn child and prevent that. We also ought to recognize that there is something seriously wrong with a society that in general sees nothing wrong with killing unborn children. It's an intellectual and spiritual sickness and error as well as a sin against justice.

It would be nice if the Democratic party would stop treating abortion as if it's a fundamental human right. If they did, they would probably get further with other aspects of their political aspirations.

Is it possible, just possible to give George W. Bush any credit? It is a big deal that prolife justices are appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. It is a big deal that human living embryos were not used by bottom feeding scientists is some ghoulish experiment.

Also, let's talk about poverty and abortion but how about race and abortion. Your beloved Planned Parenthood is in every poor and African American neighborhood "fixing" the problem. Your beloved PP has never backed away from the eugenic and racist views of Margaret Sanger. Imagine if all the government money that went to PP would go to the poor or to eliminate racism.

Let's compare Bush to your beloved Obama who is radically pro-abortion. Let's talk about your Obama and the trail of blood of innocent unarmed people being killed by terrorists or attempted terrorist attacks. It seems innocent people were not in harms way with Bush.

Who's more pro-life? Bush by a landslide!

I say AMEN to that.

Wonderfully stated.          

The challenge to change course in the heatedly entrenched and highly politicized culture wars is no small task.     As the saying goes,   it's hard to drain the swamp when you are up to your fanny-feathers in angry alligators.

Perhaps the answer lies in having a more genuine Christianity and less of strident ideology.

What is next? Will they make Bush a Saint next? Catholic wisdom of some organisations is ineed difficult wisdom, particularly when it comes to life issues. Where is the justice of the killing of thousands in Irak?

Thank you.

Thank you for this article. In the Philippines, Benigno Aquino III's candidacy for the Presidency is not getting the support of the Catholic Church because he was chair of the committee in charge of the reproductive health bill. Gloria Arroyo, on the other hand, toes the church line on reproductive health but lets atrocities like the Maguindanao massacre take place. Because she plays well with the sensibilities of the church hierarchy (and of course gives monthly allocations to key bishops), it will take another Cardinal Sin to unite the Church against the clear evil that Gloria is.

I'm not only a supporter of Aquino, I'm also a feminist and I'm running for mayor of my city. Naturally, my stand on reproductive health is also one of the issues that gets raised. We're not even discussing abortion here, just artificial methods that the Church teaches are abortifacient. You raised several good points in your article. For any politician to be pro-life should mean to fight for social policies that help pregnant women and vulnerable families.

In this, Shakespeare's famous line from "Julius Caesar" -- "The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones." -- is proved wrong. Cardinal Bernadin's image of the seamless garment still lives! And it certainly doesn't fit the former President Bush!

It is nice that Mr. Gehring can sit back in the comfort of his advocacy position and complain about the contributions of George W. Bush to the "pro-life agenda". It is a shame that Mr. Bush was not a perfect hitter in this "game". But his 400+ batting average is better than any other president has achieved and likely to be 600 points better than our current president, who may actually wind up with aminus betting average. In any case I doubt that Mr. Gehring could even get a hit in the game at that level of politics and advocacy. I'd like to see a perfect world too but that is not what God gave us. Stop compl;aining for the lack of perfection and at least recognize with good spirit a positive achievement when it is produced.

Thank you for this very helpful article. In the Philippines, Benigno Aquino III isn't getting flak from the Catholic hierarchy because he was chair of the committee that took up the Reproductive Health Bill in our senate. Meanwhile, despite her lies, cheating, corruption, and atrocities like the Maguindanao Massacre, Gloria Arroyo basks in the good will of many key bishops of the Philippines, just because she toes the Church's line on reproductive health.

I'm not only for Aquino, I'm a Catholic feminist (active in Christian Family Movement, Cursillo, the diocese) who is running for mayor against 3 men. My stand on reproductive health is therefore something people ask about though they don't ask the men the same questions. I have 7 kids and I know how difficult natural methods are. Even if they are 98% accurate, as good as or better than the artificial methods, the natural methods can work only when couples cooperate. Given conditions in the Philippines especially in our poorer quarters, most wives are not in a position to say "No" when a husband uses violence, threat, and intimidation to demand sex. I don't know what priests say to women in their 40s who are pregnant with their 7th or 10th child but who have no real source of income so have children who are malnourished and can't go to school. Obviously, prayer and faith and all the teaching on natural family planning isn't going to help.

You're right that social policies to help pregnant women and vulnerable families is more likely to save lives than all this shortsighted focus on a single issue.

A refreshing piece amidst all the single-focus diatribes. Thank you.

What, not one word about the million or so killed as a result of Bush's pro choice wars!

Perhaps Legatus (and other selectively pro-life groups like them) needs to go back to Catholic teaching about respect for life..."From conception to natural death." Support of the Death penalty and war, innocent civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, millions of deaths in Africa from AIDS, poverty, hunger, lack of health care. HHHMMM Not sure these are valid qualifications for a Pro-life award!

We are living in times that try people's souls. Words and meanings are misused and twisted. Lobbyists seem to form the final decisions. It is getting to be a fearful time to stand up what you believe in. In many cases then you will no longer really fit. What a scary time for our country and for us as individuals. Lord have mercy. God have mercy, Lord have mercy.

''The abortion rate for women living in poverty is more than four times higher than for those earning 300 percent above the poverty line.''

Could this fact have anything to do with the fact that many if not most abortion businesses are strategically situated in the poorest areas of large urban centres. Rich people don't want the messy reality of abortion under their noses and Planned Parenthood and their ilk know that poor people are more vunerable to their propaganda that abortion is a solution.

Legatus is the organization designed exclusively for top-ranking Catholic business leaders. Here are its membership criteria: Executive Membership Criteria
Primary membership for the top ranking Catholic in a business

Requirements
Manufacturing/Sales/Service
Financial Services
1) Title

Chairman, President, CEO, Owner, Managing Director, Managing Partner, Publisher

Same titles

2) Personnel

30 employees
OR
10 employees and $1M annual payroll

10 employees

3) Volume/Value

$5 Million
OR
$10M Net Value

$100 Million (assets)

Division Head Membership Criteria
The top ranking Catholic in a qualifying division or subsidiary

Requirements

Manufacturing/Sales/Service
Financial Services
1) Title

Chairman, President, CEO, Owner, Managing Director, Managing Partner, Publisher, Executive Vice President

2) Personnel

30 employees
OR
10 employees and $1M annual payroll

10 employees

3) Volume/Value

$5 Million
OR
$10M Net Value

$100 Million (assets)

Intermediate Membership Criteria
Adjusted Criteria for Applicants under the age of 40
75% of full criteria. 15% prior 3-year growth. Must meet full criteria by 45th birthday.
Requirements
Manufacturing/Sales/Service
Financial Services
1) Title

Chairman, President, CEO, Owner, Managing Director, Managing Partner, Publisher

Same titles

2) Personnel

22 employees
OR
$750,000 annual payroll

8 employees

3) Volume/Value

$3.75 Million
OR
$7.5M net value

$75 Million (assets)

© Legatus 2003. All Ri

You've got it! Someone has finally understood what so many of us are trying to say without ever feeling heard.
May you at least be heard!
Your column makes this Sunday morning a nice day to wake up to :-)
Thank you and blessings.

One word to describe this mockery definition of human life respect, DISGRACEFUL. It shows you why we can't get a health bill passed in congress with such ignorant thinking. Roger

I could not agree more. This is what I have been saying for a long time. I think both Parties are hypocritical when it comes to this issue.

Excellent article pointing out the complexity of trying to solve this problem.

Politicians who claim to be pro-life on the abortion issue always have a qualifier: "I am against abortion, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother." This was George Bush's position.

How is this consistent with Catholic teaching on life? It is okay to abort if a child is conceived in a rape? That's news to me. Yet our bishops continue to accept these positions as being pro-life. No denying communion for politicians who take this stand.

Well put. Even within the "abortion" context it is a travesty of both language, morality and politics to equate "pro-life" with and only with those who adamantly demand that abortion be punishable by law. It is akin, in the abuse of language at least, to equating "anti-war" with disrespect for the young men and women who serve in the military.

While freedom of speech is a sacred value, there is nothing sacred about pressing one's point by, what is in fact, unethical use of language. It is curious to me, or maybe I am biased, but these abuses of language, honesty and of debate, seem to be more frequently the weapons of the sanctimonious and so called-principaled.

Thank you, Mr. Gehring, for this article. It rightly states the offensive nature of this award for us who profess to honor a "seamless garment" in human dignity and right to life. For this I am most grateful.

I was disappointed however that you neglected to mention that Cardinal Francis George will also receive a Legatus award and therefore share limelight with President Bush. As I recall during the Notre Dame U uproar last spring Cardinal George's response, though muted, wasn't positive for the presence and award to President Obama, whose stance on abortion parallels the one mentioned above. As President of the USCCB and one of the "best minds" of the USA hierarch" it should be expected he'd be one to challenge the rest of us (including the Legatus people) to respect and publically promote towards a seamless-garment-approach to human dignity. I can only hope the good Cardinal will take opportunity to make this happen on Monday, but I don't think it will. "Where there is no vision, the people perish."

"The singular focus on abortion as the arbiter of what it means to be "pro-life" has also severely narrowed our national discourse about moral values in the public square."
and: "The abortion rate for women living in poverty is more than four times higher than for those earning 300 percent above the poverty line." Says it all. This polarization has abandoned the poor...and especially in these times. Pro-life is all life. Why is that not what I hear?
-Thank you, Mr. Gehring! It needs to be said!

Very interesting!!!

George W. Bush will receive a pro-life award.

Here is a mass murderer and a war criminal receiving a pro-life award.

He has also approved the torture of numerous human beings.

He put on the Supreme Court justices who have said that corporations are persons and yet we cannot sue corporations like we can sue actual people. Corporations can be negligent in the life of people but they cannot be sued.

Thank you John for a great article!!!

I did more research and found that the USCCB does have a comprehensive Pastoral Plan for LIfe: http://www.usccb.org/prolife/pastoralplan.shtml

However, at what point will it be evaluated? It is almost ten years old and I wonder if those who crafted it think it is successful, or if parts work but other parts do not.

For example, in 2001 when the Plan was published, less than 1 million (c. 850,000) procured abortions were reported per year in the USA: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5309a1.htm.

The most recent stats I can find is that as of 2005 the number is virtually unchanged; one source (how reliable? Wikipedia?!) lists the numbers through 2009 at about the same: 850,000 US abortions per year, and many are by women who have already had one abortion.

I am reminded of the USCCB's campaign "Renewing the Mind of the Media" that had no real goals that could be evaluated and it eventually fizzled.

What the current Pastoral Plan for Life has is many elements that can be evaluated.

Will the USCCB take this on so they can see what parts are effective and those that are not? Those that can be improved?

Is anyone evaluating the benefit of excommunication of politicians that vote pro-abortion?

When I think of the US Bishops and Pro-Life activities and efforts, the Pastoral Plan does not come to mind. All I hear is rhetoric and excommunication. My hunch is that women seeking abortion disregard the voice of the US Bishops and all of us as irrelevant - but this is me.

It is very hard to measure success and sometimes the greatest successes are known only to God.

However, I hope the Bishops will evaluate the plan (and if they have already announced that they will do this and I missed it, I apologize) and perhaps add in storytelling. The storytellers own the culture. If the only sound we hear is excommunication (is it part of the plan?) then this is what trickles down to women in crisis or women who are not thinking clearly and they write the Church off as irrelevant and laughable.

Everything the Plan calls for seems very good; but is something missing? Given that the number of abortions in the US has not changed (though the demographics may have) I think so.

Great comment. I have been saying and preaching the same for a while, getting flack from devout conservative catholics. You have to be in favor of life after leaving the womb, like not going to war, providing health care and jobs for kids' parents, schools which work, jobs, etc. Glad to find a soul mate who thinks like I do. May many more see the light.