Still Evil.

For doing his pastoral duty.

Here is Senator Obama describing what he will look for in a judge if elected president:

[W]hat I do want is a judge who is sympathetic enough to those who are on the outside, those who are vulnerable, those who are powerless, those who can’t have access to political power and as a consequence can’t protect themselves from being being dealt with sometimes unfairly, that the courts become a refuge for justice. That’s been its historic role. That was its role in Brown v Board of Education.

Except for unborn babies, of course.

Those, you can kill with impunity (even after they’re born).

The Culture of Death marches on.

But this kind of nonsense makes me want to send my son to TAC instead of Notre Dame (where I am confident there is little to no support for proabortion political candidates on campus).

Courtesy of Professor Douglas W. Kmiec, whose head is now deeply buried in the proverbial sand:

“I do not understand Senator Obama to be pro-abortion . . . .”

Really?

Then perhaps you need to brush up on your research skills, professor.

I’ve had a few requests for the links to my appearance on Hardball that took place during my sabbatical from SA (May 30, 2007). There were two segments, and you can watch them here and here.

Nat Hentoff, “a nonreligious pro-lifer” and columnist for the Washington Times, nails it:

[O]n abortion, Mr. Obama is an extremist. He has opposed the Supreme Court decision that finally upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act against that form of infanticide. Most startlingly, for a professed humanist, Mr. Obama in the Illinois Senate also voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act . . . . Furthermore . . . [Obama] “voted to kill a bill that would have required an abortionist to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor girl from another state.” . . . . 

As I was researching this presidential candidate’s views on the unilateral “choice” that takes another’s life, I heard on the radio what Mr. Obama said during a Johnstown, Pa., town-hall meeting on March 29 . . . ”But if they [his daughters] make a mistake . . . I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Among my children and grandchildren are two daughters and three granddaughters; and when I hear anyone, including a presidential candidate, equate having a baby as punishment, I realize with particular force the impact that the millions of legal abortions in this country have had on respect for human life.

Read the entire piece. It is most excellent.

(LvFT)

Whither the concern for scandal?

Three cheers for Cardinal Egan.

Update: For thoughtful commentary on the matter, see here, here, here, and here.

LifeNews has this report.

NARAL strongly opposes his candidacy.

Hey, Rev. Wright, here’s a sermon for you to preach.

[Ed. This is a post from my "Alexham" archives over at RedState. I am reposting it here because I believe the overall message of the post needs to be restated before we gather together for the national convention in September.]

I can still remember the day after the 1994 midterm elections. It was an unusually sunny day in the Southland, and all seemed right with the world. After all of those years in the wilderness, the Republicans had finally taken control of the House, and soon thereafter, the Senate. We would do things differently, we promised. We were a different kind of political party. Unlike the Democrats, who only care for power for power’s sake, we sought power to make a profound difference in the lives of every-day Americans.

How different things look thirteen years later. Somewhere along the line, we lost our way. I think most Republicans instinctively know this, but have trouble articulating exactly when things began to unravel for our party. What we do know is that the Republican Party is at crossroads. We are a party in search of an identity, and the path we choose will have long-term ramifications not only for the GOP, but for these United States. (more…)

I found this extremely encouraging:

Pope Benedict XVI received an ecstatic welcome from 57,000 faithful in Yankee Stadium for the final Mass of his six-day visit to the U.S., drawing applause when he spoke of protecting unborn children and when he called a new generation to priesthood and religious life . . . [W]hile calling young people to put their faith in Christ into action, he made his strongest statement of the visit regarding abortion.

He asked them to uphold “truths which alone can guarantee respect for the inalienable dignity and rights of each man, woman and child in our world — including the most defenseless of all human beings, the unborn child in the mother’s womb,” he said, to long, loud applause.

Moloch is, no doubt, very pleased with his loyal servant Senator Barbara Boxer.

Apparently not.

These Catholic dems could take lessons from President Bush, a Methodist, on how to show proper respect for the Holy Eucharist.

Many social conservatives (including yours truly) have, at times, questioned Senator McCain’s commitment to the pro-life cause. Well, last night I was watching Chris Matthews’s Hardball College Tour interview with the good senator, and I must to say that I was extremely impressed with his performance. His finest moment by far, in my humble opinion, was the strong stand he took for a Culture of Life in this country:

(start watching the video at about the 1:35 mark)

Well done, Senator McCain. I am proud to support you.

Father Frank Pavone would like to see some “clarity” in our political discourse with respect to the abortion issue.  

Over at Vox Nova (my old blogging home), one of the contributors Gerald L. Campbell, accused me of being a “one issue person” (read: single-issue voter), noting, “[t]hat explains everything you say.”  And I want to state publicly that Gerald is absolutely right. Abortion is the single most important issue to me as a voter.* Thankfully, I am in good company.

Pope Benedict XVI has called abortion “today’s gravest injustice.”

Pope John Paul II:

“Laws which legitimize the direct killing of innocent human beings…are in complete opposition to the inviolable right to life proper to every individual; they thus deny the equality of everyone before the law” (Evangelium Vitae, 72). What is at stake here is nothing less than the indivisible truth about the human person on which the Founding Fathers staked your nation’s claim to independence.

Mother Teresa believed that “the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself.”

But you see, I simply don’t understand what it truly means to be a Catholic. Because if I did, my “conscience” would tell me that there are indeed ”proportionate reasons” to vote for a man who lead the charge to deny babies who survive botched abortions basic medical care, and to vote against a man who, with one notable exception, has a sterling pro-life record.

Silly me. It must be that “protestant baggage” I brought with me into the Catholic Church.

*Perhaps my buddy Christopher can design a cool “One Isssue Voter” button that folks can place on their blogs if they so choose.

Courtesy of South Park and my buddy Ben Domenech.

Christopher Kaczor has the details over at First Things’s On the Square blog.

(LvRamesh)

Excellent.

How do you like them apples, Catholics for Wilfully Disobeying the Church’s Non-negotiable and Crystal-clear Teaching on Abortion?

This is discouraging, to say the least.

But it isn’t helping matters that Senator McCain has declined to reverse course on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Say what you will about President Bush, but on the non-negotiables he was almost perfect. And while Senator McCain’s pro-life record is much. much stronger than Senator Obama’s, the fact remains that his support of federal funding for ESCR is enough for some Catholics to ditch the GOP and return home to the Democratic Party. If this happens, McCain and the GOP are in big trouble.

As yes, Moloch is strongly opposed to this kind of blatantly “anti-choice” legislation. We simply cannot allow mothers to see what it really means to have an abortion performed. We must continue to refer to an unborn baby as a ”fetus” or ”mass of tissue,” and any attempt to show a mother that what grows inside her is an actual human being must be stopped at all costs.     

My co-blogger at RedState, Leon Wolf, has today’s must-read post. Here’s a taste:

However, it remains a basic fact in this country that abortion (to an intellectually honest pro-lifer) represents the unjust taking of approximately 1.2 million lives each and every year. Or, for perspective, somewhere between 5 and 6 million lives unjustly taken since the start of the Iraq War. Of course, numbers do not tell the whole story - respect for life is not a numbers-counting game. It is true that in some limited circumstances, one kind of unjust life-taking may be more injurious to the fabric of a society than another, despite involving less lives taken. However, in this case, it is virtually impossible for a conservative to imagine anything that could be more destructive to the fabric of society as a whole than the real and symbolic destruction of the family unit and family responsibilities that abortion represents. An unjust war might say that we have poor judgment, are overly aggressive, are greedy, or whatever your personal conspiracy theory leads you to believe about why we entered the war. The specter of legalized abortion in this country says that we as a society are okay with parents legally killing their children en masse.

The only explanation for Kmiec['s] . . . abdication of reason that I can credit is the fact that there have been hundreds and thousands of mass media stories over the last four years about the number of people killed in Iraq, and almost no stories during that same time period about the number of people killed by abortion. This explanation is sufficient to explain why the average voter considers Iraq to be a more important issue than abortion - it should not be sufficient to explain why individuals of allegedly deep thought and insight should be so easily swayed . . . . As far as Kmiec - who less than four months ago was telling us all to vote for Mitt Romney - I can fathom no explanation or excuse whatsoever for his apparent willingness to cast his vote according to the whims of a pop-star besotted teenage girl. (more…)

This is only the beginning.

Unlike the Clintonistas, we won’t hold anything back.

Obama will lose in November, and it’s not going to be pretty.

Michael Gerson nails it:

Obama’s record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion — a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called “too close to infanticide.” Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be “punished with a baby” because of a crisis pregnancy — hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life.

For decades, most Democrats and many Republicans have hoped the political debate on abortion would simply go away. But it is the issue that does not die. Recent polls have shown that young people are more likely than their elders to support abortion restrictions. Few Americans oppose abortion under every circumstance, but a majority oppose most of the abortions that actually take place — generally supporting the procedure only in the case of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother. (more…)

Rakes in the blood-money profits.