All Hands On Deck Endorses Rick Santorum for President

It is my pleasure to announce that the All Hands On Deck blog is formally endorsing Rick Santorum’s candidacy for President of the United States.

After much thought and analysis including an examination of the candidate’s positions, experience, and relevant background information, plus their performance in debates and primary voting to date, the this blog believes that Mr. Santorum is the best candidate to defeat President Obama in the general election and is the best candidate to govern this nation for the next four years:

First, Mr. Santorum is a passionate defender of the Judeo-Christian values that undergird American society, and he is as strong a pro-life advocate as one will find. Mr. Santorum more than any other candidate understands that the crisis that we are struggling through in this nation is as much a moral crisis as an economic one. He is a tremendous advocate of family values and has spoken repeatedly about how the contemporary breakdown of marriage and the family threatens the health and future of our nation. He understands that healthy, stable families are the building blocks of a prosperous society.

With religious belief and practice under assault by the current administration and the culture at large, Mr Santorum is an ideal candidate to give voice to the concerns of believers across the country. He is a devout Christian, a Roman Catholic, whose faith permeates his very being.

Second, Mr. Santorum can speak to the economic concerns of everyday people in a way the other candidates cannot. He comes from a blue-collar background and consistently addresses the plight of the working class. Many working-class people are facing unprecedented struggles and have been alienated by the current President’s elitism and disrespect for traditional American values. Many of them traditionally vote Democrat. This latter group of voters (once known as “Reagan Democrats”) is there for the taking, if the Republicans run the right candidate. This blog believes that Mr. Santorum is the ideal candidate to win over these voters.

Third, Mr. Santorum is a much more sincere and consistent candidate than his opponents. He knows what his beliefs are, he sticks with them, and he fights for them. What you see is what you get. No one needs to worry that he will suddenly become someone else when he becomes President.

Fourth, while Mr. Santorum does not have executive experience, he did play a significant role in the Republican Senate leadership and was successful in working across the aisle to push through bi-partisan initiatives, while remaining true to his core values. That experience and those skills will serve him well in the White House.

Fifth, the biggest threat to liberty in this country is Obamacare. Mr. Santorum has opposed Obamacare and the idea of an individual madate from the start. He will be able to challenge the President on this issue in a way that Mr. Romney, the author of Romneycare, will not.

Finally, contrary to elite opinion, Mr. Santorum is the most electable candidate. Current polls show him running better against President Obama than Mitt Romney in a number of critical swing states.

Accordingly, the All Hands On Deck blog is proud to endorse Rick Santorum for President!

Cardinal George: If the health care mandate stands, two years from now, Catholic hospitals, schools, and social agencies will be gone

Sobering words from Francis Cardinal George:

...Why does a governmental administrative decision now mean the end of institutions that have been built up over several generations from small donations, often from immigrants, and through the services of religious women and men and others who wanted to be part of the church’s mission in healing and education? Catholic hospitals, universities and social services have an institutional conscience, a conscience shaped by Catholic moral and social teaching. The HHS regulations now before our society will make it impossible for Catholic institutions to follow their conscience.

So far in American history, our government has respected the freedom of individual conscience and of institutional integrity for all the many religious groups that shape our society. The government has not compelled them to perform or pay for what their faith tells them is immoral. That’s what we’ve meant by freedom of religion. That’s what we had believed was protected by the U.S. Constitution. Maybe we were foolish to believe so.

What will happen if the HHS regulations are not rescinded? A Catholic institution, so far as I can see right now, will have one of four choices: 1) secularize itself, breaking its connection to the church, her moral and social teachings and the oversight of its ministry by the local bishop. This is a form of theft. It means the church will not be permitted to have an institutional voice in public life. 2) Pay exorbitant annual fines to avoid paying for insurance policies that cover abortifacient drugs, artificial contraception and sterilization. This is not economically sustainable. 3) Sell the institution to a non-Catholic group or to a local government. 4) Close down.

In the public discussion thus far, efforts have been made to isolate the bishops from the Catholic faithful by focusing attention exclusively on “reproductive” issues. But the acrimony could as easily focus next year or the year after on assisted suicide or any other moral issue that can be used to distract attention from the attack on religious liberty. Many will recognize in these moves a tactic now familiar in our public life: those who cannot be co-opted are isolated and then destroyed. The arguments used are both practical and theoretical.

Practically, we’re told that the majority of Catholics use artificial contraception. There are properly medical reasons, in some circumstances, for the use of contraceptive pills, as everyone knows. But even if contraceptives were used by a majority of couples only and exclusively to suppress a possible pregnancy, behavior doesn’t determine morality. If it can be shown that a majority of Catholic students cheat on their exams, it is still wrong to cheat on exams. Trimming morality to how we behave guts the Gospel call to conversion of life and rejection of sin.

Theoretically, it is argued that there are Catholic voices that disagree with the teaching of the church and therefore with the bishops. There have always been those whose personal faith is not adequate to the faith of the church. Perhaps this is the time for everyone to re-read the Acts of the Apostles. Bishops are the successors of the apostles; they collectively receive the authority to teach and govern that Christ bestowed upon the apostles. Bishops don’t claim to speak for every baptized Catholic. Bishops speak, rather, for the Catholic and apostolic faith. Those who hold that faith gather with them; others go their own way. They are and should be free to do so, but they deceive themselves and others in calling their organizations Catholic.

Since 1915, the Catholic bishops of the United States have taught that basic health care should be accessible to all in a just society. Two years ago, we asked that whatever instruments were crafted to care for all, the Hyde and Weldon and Church amendments restricting funding for abortion and respecting institutional conscience continue to be incorporated into law. They were excluded. As well, the present health care reform act doesn’t cover entire sections of the U.S. population. It is not universal.

The provision of health care should not demand “giving up” religious liberty. Liberty of religion is more than freedom of worship. Freedom of worship was guaranteed in the Constitution of the former Soviet Union. You could go to church, if you could find one. The church, however, could do nothing except conduct religious rites in places of worship-no schools, religious publications, health care institutions, organized charity, ministry for justice and the works of mercy that flow naturally from a living faith. All of these were co-opted by the government. We fought a long cold war to defeat that vision of society.

The strangest accusation in this manipulated public discussion has the bishops not respecting the separation between church and state. The bishops would love to have the separation between church and state we thought we enjoyed just a few months ago, when we were free to run Catholic institutions in conformity with the demands of the Catholic faith, when the government couldn’t tell us which of our ministries are Catholic and which not, when the law protected rather than crushed conscience. The state is making itself into a church. The bishops didn’t begin this dismaying conflict nor choose its timing. We would love to have it ended as quickly as possible. It’s up to the government to stop the attack.

If you haven’t already purchased the Archdiocesan Directory for 2012, I would suggest you get one as a souvenir. On page L-3, there is a complete list of Catholic hospitals and health care institutions in Cook and Lake counties. Each entry represents much sacrifice on the part of medical personnel, administrators and religious sponsors. Each name signifies the love of Christ to people of all classes and races and religions. Two Lents from now, unless something changes, that page will be blank...

Movie review: "There Be Dragons"

I finally had a chance to watch the movie "There Be Dragons" on DVD yesterday.

The movie, set in Spain during the troubled period of the Spanish Civil War, tells the story of St. Josemaria Escriva and the founding of Opus Dei and examines how Spanish society was torn apart by the conflict.

Although the movie received mixed reviews from the critics, I really enjoyed the film, which I found to be well-crafted, emotionally moving, and thought-provoking.

The Trailer:

The Benefits of Natural Family Planning

The Family Life Office of the Diocese of Charleston, South Carolina has a web page which provides a nice overview of the benefits of Natural Family Planning:

Fertility Appreciation is the foundation of Natural Family Planning. It is the ability of a couple to understand and respect their fertility.

Many couples find that the love and respect each holds for the other grows as their understanding and appreciation of their fertility grow.

They accept fertility as a normal and healthy process, a precious gift from God to be loved, respected, understood and wisely used.

Advantages of NFP:

1) It is medically safe.

2) It is highly reliable.

3) It is morally acceptable.

4) It is easy to learn.

5) It is inexpensive.

6) It is highly versatile - it can be used at any stage of a woman's reproductive life.

7) It precisely identifies the true days of fertility and infertility.

8) It is a valuable aid for couples who are having difficulty in achieving pregnancy.

Shared Responsibility: Unlike contraceptives, this method is equally the responsibility of both the husband and wife. Couples learn to understand their combined fertility.

A True Method of Family Planning: The method can be used both to achieve and to avoid pregnancy, making it a true method of family planning. It has the added benefit of being a record of the woman's reproductive health.

Enhances One's Sexuality: The couple learns that true sexuality is spiritual, physical, intellectual, creative and emotional in its dimensions. The use of Natural Family Planning assists the couple in developing balance in their sexual life together.

Loving Cooperation: The method helps build a more loving cooperation in the important matters of sexuality and family planning. It builds a stronger partnership between husband and wife, as well as increased communication, intimacy and respect.

Effectiveness: The effectiveness of NFP is over 99% in avoiding pregnancy when the instructions are properly taught by a qualified teacher and then correctly applied. The method is also highly effective to achieve pregnancy when couples identify and use the days of fertility. In addition, it is an essential aid in the evaluation and treatment of those couples who are experiencing infertility.

Natural Family Planning Resources:
-- Key Church documents on human sexuality, marriage, and family life:

• Familiaris consortio: The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World
  Pope John Paul II, 1980
• Humanae vitae: On the Regulation of Births
  Pope Paul VI, 1968
• Casti connubii: On Christian Marriage
  Pope Pius XI, 1930

-- Links to other helpful resources:

The Couple-to-Couple-League is an excellent organization that provides NFP resources, classes, and educational materials. They have affiliated local teaching couples throughout the country.

Contraception, Why Not by Dr. Janet Smith is the most persuasive presentation of the Church's teaching on artificial contraception I have come across. The first time I heard it, it really blew away any reservations or misunderstandings I had about the issue. Contraception, Why Not? is available here in CD, DVD, and MP-3 formats. I highly recommend it.

One More Soul is another excellent organization that has a variety of resources related to natural planning including and invaluable on-line directory of NFP only physicians.

A list of NFP benefits that speaks to a modern, secular audience can be found HERE.

My blog post, Why the Catholic Church Opposes Contraception, be found HERE.

An excellent (and short) explanation of the Church's teaching on contraception can be found HERE.

A President's Day Message from the Knights of Columbus

Religious freedom - In the words of our Presidents:

Notable quote: The Second Vatican Council on the Pope's Authority

From the Vatican II document Dogmatic Constitution On The Church, Lumen Gentium:

...But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head. The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head the Roman Pontiff and never without this head. This power can be exercised only with the consent of the Roman Pontiff...

Kilkelly: A song that captures the painful family separation at the heart of Irish immigration

This is my favorite song of all time, and the most emotionally-moving. The song is based on the real life-letters of an Irish father to his emigrant son in America.

As the son of Irish immigrants, this song really hits home with me. I have long understood the sadness and longing of the emigrant who has left home for a faraway land. But, it was not until I became a parent myself that I began to comprehend the loss and sorrow of the parents left behind (my grandparents, for example).

This song captures those feelings better than anything else I have come across.The song always brings tears to my eyes and makes me want to reach out and hold my kids tight.

Act of Valor - Trailer

This movie looks really intriguing.

The actors are real-life, active duty Navy SEALs.



The Act of Valor website can be found HERE.

The movie opens on February 24th.

Fr. Leo Patalinghug of "Grace Before Meals" weighs in on the health care mandate

Well done!



Father Leo's website, Grace Before Meals, can be found HERE.

"Contraception and Catholicism: What the Church really teaches"

As the healthcare mandate controversy rages on, I was pleasantly surprised to come across this short, but insightful, explanation of the Church's teaching on the issue of contraception.

Personally, I think the Church's teaching on marriage, sexuality and the family is incredibly beautiful, dignified, and uplifting.

Whether one agrees or disagrees, this short essay provides a succinct and powerful explanation of the teaching, while leaving the open-minded reader with a lot of food for thought.

From National Review Online:

Catholic teaching on contraception is at the heart of the controversy over the Health and Human Services mandate. Catholic hospitals and universities are unwilling to purchase insurance plans that provide contraceptive coverage. To critics, this unwillingness borders on the irrational; accordingly, they see little value in protecting the freedom of Catholic hospitals and universities to act in accordance with their beliefs.

Catholic teaching about contraception is, however, not irrational; nor is it founded, as some have claimed, on irrelevant distinctions such as that between what is natural and what is “artificial.” Rather, two lines of argument are to be found throughout the tradition of Catholic, and more generally, Christian, thought on this issue that together show the teaching to be plausible and, in the view of many, true.

The first argument against contraception turns on the way in which the conjugal act unites the married couple organically as one flesh, so as to realize at the physical level of their existence their marital commitment to become one — to make a complete and mutual gift of each to each. Together, spouses are able to perform a biological act that they would be incapable of performing alone: an act of a reproductive kind. As is well known, this act will often not come to its natural biological fulfillment, the conception of a new human being.

Yet when the act does come to fruition, that fruition is itself — or rather, him- or herself — the further realization of the couple’s commitment, the commitment that was initially realized in the conjugal act. For a couple to prevent their act from achieving its fullest realization is thus also for them to choose to block the fullest possible realization of their commitment at the bodily level — and this is precisely at odds with the commitment itself. It is for this reason that Pope John Paul II frequently characterized the use of contraception as a kind of dishonesty: The making of the commitment to a complete sharing of lives says one thing; the deliberate blocking of that commitment from its fullest realization takes back what was initially communicated.

The way in which the act of intercourse can be prevented from realizing the marital commitment is clearest in the use of barrier methods such as the condom, which rather obviously prevent the one-flesh union from even being possible. But hormonal contraceptives, while not preventing physically an act of a reproductive type, nevertheless, when used with a contraceptive intention, involve a willed refusal to allow the biological function, in virtue of which couples become physically one, to come fully to its fruition; thus, their use involves a refusal to countenance the fullness of physical union possible to the couple on that occasion.

Pope Paul VI captured the sense of this set of claims in a well-known discussion in Humanae Vitae, in which he asserted that there is an “inseparable connection . . . between the unitive and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.” To deliberately seek to remove the procreative significance of the marital act does not, in fact, leave a unitive act that has no procreative significance; it removes as well the unitive significance of the act.

Defenders of traditional sexual ethics such as Elizabeth Anscombe have argued that the embrace of contraception is a turning point for sexual ethics more generally. If it is permissible to seek less than the fullness of the real union possible on some occasion in one’s sex acts, then why stop with contracepted sex? Why not seek the less-than-full union available in sex outside of marriage, or in some non-marital form of sexual activity? No good answer seems forthcoming.

In consequence, contraception is understood by the Church both as a violation of the marital commitment — as preventing its fullest available realization — and as a gateway choice to other abuses against the good of marriage.

Contraception’s gateway character is in fact twofold, for in addition to this important strand of argument against contraception rooted in its anti-marital nature, there is also an argument rooted in its anti-life nature: To contracept is to choose to prevent a possible child from coming into existence (a choice that is not made, incidentally, when the couple abstains from the marital act — which is what happens in Catholic family planning). But human life, like marriage, is a great good; and to choose directly against that good seems wrong, and structurally similar to the wrong of homicide, and, specifically, the wrong of abortion. They are not the same wrongs, for there is no actual child in the case of contraception, as there is in abortion; but a culture shaped by collective willing of the non-existence of many possible children should be expected to extend that denial to the right to life of unborn human beings as well.

This dynamic is seen in the HHS mandate, which includes in its list of covered pharmaceuticals drugs such as Ella and Plan B, which are plausibly thought to work on occasion by preventing implantation of an embryo, i.e., by abortion. This willingness to lump in abortifacient drugs with contraceptives is a sign, but only one of many, of the Church’s wisdom in its teaching on contraception.

— Christopher Tollefsen is a visiting fellow of the James Madison Program at Princeton University.

I believe the Church has been absolutely right in its opposition to contraception.

For those who wish to learn more about why the Church is correct on this issue, another excellent commentary and further resource links can be found HERE.

"Obama chief of staff: No more compromise, contraceptive rule is done deal"

The President has drawn a line in the sand.

In essence, he is saying that religious believers can take their concerns and shove them.

From Fox News:

Despite renewed statements of concern by Catholic leaders, the Obama administration is done negotiating and will finalize its plan requiring insurance companies to provide free contraception to women working and studying at religious institutions, President Obama's chief of staff said Sunday.

Jacob Lew told "Fox News Sunday" that the compromise offered last week to address objections by the Catholic Church is clear and consistent with the president's "very deep belief that a woman has a right to all forms of preventive health care, including contraception."

"We have set out our policy," Lew said. "We are going to finalize it in the final rules, but I think what the president announced on Friday is a balanced approach that meets the concerns raised both in terms of access to health care and in terms of protecting religious liberties, and we think that's the right approach."

On Friday, Obama revised his decision to require all employers to provide contraceptive care after Catholic organizations balked that it is an intrusion on the Church's religious liberty to require it to provide birth control. The president changed the mandate to shift the burden to insurance companies to provide free access to birth control and other forms of contraception.

"No institution, nonprofit institution, that has religious principles that would be violated has to pay for or directly offer these services, but women have access to the kinds of care they're entitled to. We think that's the right approach," Lew said Sunday.

"This is a solution so that they are not providing it, so they're not offering it, they're not paying for it. So women have the choice on their own," Lew added. I think a lot of good work was done and hopefully this will now set the issue to rest."

But Catholic leaders, while first reserving judgment, remain dissatisfied. Late Friday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement declaring the new policy of "grave moral concern" and urged Congress to overturn the regulation.

"Today's proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religions institutions and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions," the bishops said in a lengthy statement.

The bishops noted that the change appears to make no consideration for religious insurers or self-insuring religious employers -- or for religious for-profit employers and secular nonprofit employers.

"In a nation dedicated to religious liberty as its first and founding principle, we should not be limited to negotiating within these parameters. The only complete solution to this religious liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services," the bishops said.

The conference also reiterated its original objection made to the Department of Health and Human Services last year when it began developing the rule.

"All the other mandated 'preventive services' prevent disease," the bishops wrote, "and pregnancy is not a disease."

But Lew said the policy holds true to the "core principles of our country," which call for respecting religious liberty. He noted that the revision had earned support from liberal Catholics and lay groups.

"The solution that we reached is consistent with those core principles. That's why it got the support of a range of groups from the Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities to Planned Parenthood," Lew said.

He added that the law isn't just about preventing babies.

"There are many health conditions in women that are affected by whether or not contraceptive health is available," he said.

In defending the mandate, which Lew said the president was authorized to implement under the Affordable Care Act passed by Democrats in Congress in 2009, the chief of staff also argued that shifting the coverage requirement to insurance companies doesn't hurt the bottom line.

"If you were looking at an actuarial projection of the cost of a plan, it costs more to provide a plan without than it does with. This is one of those very rare cases where it actually does not cost the insurance company money to do it," he said.

With the administration fast-tracking the policy -- it had planned to roll out the requirement for employer-provided coverage for contraceptive health care over 13 months, but decided to speed up implementation, Lew said, "because clearly it wasn't helpful to have it lingering out there." -- it may be left to lawmakers -- or a new administration -- to reverse it.

"This is outrageous," said Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum on NBC's "Meet the Press. "The bottom line is that you have the federal government now saying we're going to give you a right and then say, by the way, we're going to tell you how to exercise that right."

"If we end up having to try to overcome the president's opposition by legislation, of course, I'd be happy to support it and intend to support it," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on CBS' "Face the Nation."

"It would be difficult as long as the president is rigid in his view that he gets to decide what somebody else's religion is. I assume he would veto it. But yeah, we'll be voting on that in the senate. And you can anticipate that that would happen as soon as possible," he added.

In a statement issued separately from the conference, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, said the uproar over the mandate has made clear that Americans believe in upholding the principle of religious liberty.

"Regardless of whether or not they agree with Church teaching on a particular issue, people believe strongly that the government should not force the Church and its institutions to do things it considers morally wrong. Hopefully, the ultimate resolution of this issue will reflect this longstanding American principle. No matter the outcome, we must continue to be vigilant against the encroachment of government on the free exercise of religion," he said.

Obama versus Religious Liberty

From Jack Higgins of the Chicago Sun Times:

Why the Catholic Church Opposes Contraception

With the Church's teaching against contraception domination the news this week, I though it would be a good time to reprint my annual post on this issue (with slight revisions):

Last year's Natural Family Planning Week (July 25-31, 2011) marked the 43rd anniversary of Humanae Vitae (On Human Life), the prophetic encyclical of Paul VI which reaffirmed the Catholic Church's opposition to artificial contraception.

Excerpts:

On Marriage:

...Marriage, then, is far from being the effect of chance or the result of the blind evolution of natural forces. It is in reality the wise and provident institution of God the Creator, whose purpose was to effect in man His loving design. As a consequence, husband and wife, through that mutual gift of themselves, which is specific and exclusive to them alone, develop that union of two persons in which they perfect one another, cooperating with God in the generation and rearing of new lives...

...It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience. Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner's own sake, content to be able to enrich the other with the gift of himself.

Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage. Though this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties, no one has the right to assert that it is impossible; it is, on the contrary, always honorable and meritorious. The example of countless married couples proves not only that fidelity is in accord with the nature of marriage, but also that it is the source of profound and enduring happiness.

Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents' welfare"....

On Artificial Contraception:

...Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection...

My commentary:

It would be an understatement to say the encyclical was controversial when it was released.

Pope Paul was ridiculed by many. Proponents of artificial contraception argued that widespread use of contraception would strengthen and solidify family life by easing the burden of unwanted children, would dramatically reduce (if not eliminate) the need for abortion, and would liberate women so they could become equal partners to men.

However, looking out at the cultural wreckage and family dysfunction of our society, Pope Paul has been proven right in the end. He predicted widespread use of artificial contraception would lead to:

1. "...Increased marital infidelity..."

2. "...General lowering of moral standards.."

3. "...a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and... reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires..."

Can anyone deny that all these predictions have come true?

What have been the "fruits" of artificial contraception?

• Half of marriages end in divorce
• almost half of today's babies are born out of wedlock
• 50 million abortions have been procured in the US alone over the last 30 years
• The spread of sexual disease is rampant
• "hooking up" and "friends with benefits" have replaced romance and courtship
• a popular culture rooted in the debasement, objectification, and sexual exploitation of women (have you looked at the magazines in the checkout line lately)?

This cultural wreckage is the real legacy of the widespread use of artificial contraception.

Yet, the proponents artificial birth control ridicule abstinence and argue that even more birth control is the solution to all these problems.

But, under their approach, what does a young person today have to look forward to?

• Having to "protect" themselves from their partner? How did we get to a point where we have to "protect" ourselves during an act that is supposed to be beautiful and intimate?
• Having their hearts broken over and over? And all the cynicism that results?
• As a young man, being told by society that the value and measure of a man is in the sexual conquest of women.
• As a young woman, being told by society that the value and measure of a woman is in her physical appearance, immodestly displayed.
• Having to grapple with lifelong sexual diseases (including possibility of infertility)?
• Taking an act that is meant to be beautiful, special, and UNIQUE to one's relationship with one's spouse, and turning it into something common and casual that is shared with many?
• Being in a position where one of life's greatest joys, the conception of a child, is feared and viewed as a catastrophe?
• "Living together" without commitment which studies have shown decreases their prospects for a successful marriage later on?

Why would anyone wish this lifestyle on their children?

Note: You may also be interested in my previous post explaining why Pope Benedict was right when he said recently that condoms are not the answer to the AIDS crisis in Africa.

NFP Resources:

Humane Vitae - Full text is here.

My previous posts for Natural Family Planning Week:

- Post 1 (NFP resources & information here)
- Post 2 (benefits of NFP here).

Dr. Janet Smith's Contraception, Why Not the most persuasive presentation of the Church's teaching on artificial contraception I have come across. Contraception, Why Not? is available for here in various formats (including an MP-3 download for only $0.95). I highly recommend it.

Pope Benedict on Prayer

Fr. Robert Barron weighs in on the health care mandate

Excellent as always!

Navis Pictures announces "The War of the Vendee" release date!

Navis Pictures has announced that its new film "The War of the Vendee" will be released on February 24th (updated).

Cartoon: Obama and the Church

From Michael Ramirez of Investors Business Daily (Click here for a much larger and clearer version!):

Sarah Palin: Obama "Snookered" Notre Dame

From Sarah Palin's Facebook page:

Back in May 2009, during the controversy over Notre Dame’s decision to have President Obama as their commencement speaker and honorary degree recipient, I gave a short statement to the Boston Herald: “My favorite grandpa, Clem James Sheeran, was Catholic. Irish to the core, his favorite place (other than church) was Notre Dame. I can’t imagine what he would think as the university recognizes someone who contradicts the core values of the Catholic faith by promoting an anti-life agenda.”

In his latest Washington Post column, Michael Gerson writes about the Obama administration’s war on Catholic institutions with President Obama's decision to strip conscience protections from Catholic universities, hospitals and charities.

As Gershon points out, the timing of Obama's most recent slap won't go unnoticed by the faithful: "In politics, the timing is often the message. On Jan. 20 — three days before the annual March for Life — the Obama administration announced its final decision that Catholic universities, hospitals and charities will be compelled to pay for health insurance that covers sterilization, contraceptives and abortifacients. Preparing for the march, Catholic students gathered for Mass at Verizon Center. The faithful held vigil at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. Knights of Columbus and bishops arrived to trudge in the cold along the Mall. All came to Washington in time for their mocking.”

And in this we see how the faithful at Notre Dame got snookered and how Obama has shamefully repaid their faith in him:

Both radicalism and maliciousness are at work in Obama’s decision — an edict delivered with a sneer...

The implications of Obama’s choice will take years to sort through. The immediate impact can be measured on three men:

Consider Catholicism’s most prominent academic leader, the Rev. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame. Jenkins took a serious risk in sponsoring Obama’s 2009 honorary degree and commencement address — which promised a “sensible” approach to the conscience clause. Jenkins now complains, “This is not the kind of ‘sensible’ approach the president had in mind when he spoke here.” Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped.

- Sarah Palin

The Michael Gerson op-ed that Mrs. Palin excerpts from above can be found here and is worth a read.

Here is another noteworthy quote from the Gerson piece:

...The implications of Obama’s power grab go further than contraception and will provoke opposition beyond Catholicism. Christian colleges and universities of various denominations will resist providing insurance coverage for abortifacients. And the astounding ambition of this federal precedent will soon be apparent to every religious institution. Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears...