President of Planned Parenthood to Speak at Democratic Convention

Cecile Richards, the President of Planned Parenthood and Nancy Keenan the President of the National Abortion Rights Action League, will have a place of prominence as speakers at the Democratic Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Speaking of abortion, Democratic Governor Bob Casey once wrote: "It's hard to think of anything more foreign to the principles of the Democratic Party or the whole American experience. Far from being "inclusive", it excludes an entire class of fellow human beings from our care and protection. It's the only "constitutional right" we're ashamed of, avoiding the word abortion with contorted euphemisms like "reproductive rights" and "termination" and "evacuation". Far from liberating women, abortion has become a lucrative industry, exploiting young women beyond anything ever imagined."

P>CHESAPEAKE, VA. (Catholic Online) - Next week the Republican Party gathers in Tampa, Florida to nominate Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan as their candidates. The following week the Democratic Party gathers in Charlotte, North Carolina to re-nominate President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden as their candidates.

Then, the Presidential campaign of 2012 begins in earnest in the United States. Since the candidates of both major are a foregone conclusion, do these conventions really matter? Does the selection of speakers at the conventions matter? Are the Party platforms all that important? 

My answer to all three questions is yes. 

Yesterday I wrote about the Republican Convention and Platform. Some of my readers accused me of being partisan. Once again, I write as a private citizen. Also, once again, Catholic Online is a for profit organization and is not restricted in its political speech. So, I will confess, I am a reluctant Republican. I was forced out of the Democratic Party when its leadership was hijacked by the abortion supporters and cultural revolutionaries who now control it. 

Over the years I have sincerely sought to inform my political participation by the principles offfered by Catholic Social Thought. I have taken on both major political parties in the United States over the years in my writings. Like many others, I have seriously considered helping to found an alternative. However, I have chosen to work within the current structure and thus had to choose one Party over the other. I always look to the candidate first and then to the Party platform.

The modern Democratic Party still claims to care about the poor. However, it officially rejects the cry of the poorest of the poor, our first neighbors in their mother's womb. The Democratic Party Platform calls the taking of their lives a "Right". It rejects the true Right, the inalienable Right to Life.

The efforts of Kristen Day and Democrats for Life to include language in the Party Platform recognizing the Democratic Party as a "big tent" which included pro-Life Democrats was roundly rejected. So much for the Party claim of inclusivity.

I hope there are some Pro-Life Democrats as Kristen continually asserts. I was disappointed in recent years by elected Democrats who claimed to be Pro-Life and voted in a manner completely inconsistent with it. I have also been disappointed by Republicans. So, if there are any Pro-Life Democrats left, maybe they can pick up the pieces and rebuild if the Regime ruling their Party is ousted after a loss at the Ballot Box in November.

I would love to see both major political parties in the United States Pro-Life. After all, the Right to life is not a partisan issue it is a human rights issue. It is time to acknowledge as a Nation what medical science confirms and the Natural Law reveals, children in the womb are human persons and possess that inalienable right to life our founders proclaimed in the Birth Certificate of this Nation.

Without the right to life there are no other rights. Without the freedom to be born, there are no other freedoms. Using rights language to support abortion on demand is reprehensible. That is what the Democratic Party - which once claimed to represent those with no voice - has been reduced to. 

This year the Democratic Platform officially rejects marriage and, by extension, the family and society founded upon it. They will follow the pattern of sophistry they used in rejecting the Right to Life. They will call their decision to no longer defend marriage something other than what it is.

True marriage is the most fundamental of all human social institutions. It is a relationship revealed by the natural law. Civil institutions do not create marriage nor can they create a "right" to marry for those who are incapable of it.

Party Platforms which call upon civil institutions to abandon marriage are dangerous. The institutions of government should, when acting properly, defend marriage against those who would redefine it. To do otherwise can never serve the common good.

Marriage is the lifelong union between one man and one woman ordered to love, the conception and rearing of children and the formation of family, which is the first vital cell of society. The 2012 Democratic Party Platform rejects this truth. The Party is now officially opposed to marriage.

Government has long regulated marriage for the common good. The ban on polygamy and age requirements were enforced in order to ensure that there was a mature decision at the basis of the Marriage contract.

To limit marriage to heterosexual couples is not discriminatory now, nor has it ever been. Homosexual couples cannot bring into existence what marriage intends by its very definition. A Democratic Platform Plank cannot change objective reality.

When sexual behavior between two men or two women becomes the ground for a new "right" to marry - and those who oppose this nonsense cast as opposing equal rights - we see a familiar pattern. The same pattern this once great Party followed when they rejected the Right to Life and adopted the so called "abortion right" in its place.  

Then, there is the Democratic Party's unbridled support of the bosses of the Big Unions. Effective Unions are supposed to be mediating institutions which participate in good governance and demonstrate the application of the principle of subsidiarity. 

The Bosses of the Big Unions have become what unions were organized to oppose. They are not all that different than some of the CEO's of the mega-corporations. The clearest example of the unionmovement in the United States having lost its way is found in the public sector teachers unions opposition to parental choice in education.  

The last real blue collar Pro-Life Democratic candidate for the Presidency of the United States was the late Governor of Pennsylvania Bob Casey Sr. He was denied a speaking role at the 1992 Democratic nomination convention. From that point on the hostile takeover of that once great Party rushed forward.

Historical revisionists attempt to say he was omitted from a speaking role because of his opposition to the Clinton/Gore ticket. They are wrong. The late Governor wrote a book entitled "Fighting for Life". The book details the whole troubling truth of the censorship effort and the Governors courage in the face of those who sold out the Democratic Party.

Speaking of abortion, Democratic Governor Bob Casey once wrote: "It's hard to think of anything more foreign to the principles of the Democratic Party or the whole American experience. Far from being "inclusive", it excludes an entire class of fellow human beings from our care and protection. It's the only "constitutional right" we're ashamed of, avoiding the word abortion with contorted euphemisms like "reproductive rights" and "termination" and "evacuation".

"Far from liberating women, abortion has become a lucrative industry, exploiting young women beyond anything ever imagined. When pregnancy comes at a difficult time, which is the worthier response of society: To surround mother and child alike with protection and love, or to hold out the cold comfort of an abortion clinic? Where is America's true character to be seen- in an adoptive home or at the abortion clinic? In which role is a woman more empowered - giving life or taking it?"

"These are questions that rest uneasily on the conscience of today's Democratic Party. We have traded our principles for power - the fleeting power offered by loud and well financed factions like NARAL and Planned Parenthood. We can choose to extend once again the mantle of protection to all members of the human family, including the unborn. We can choose to provide effective care of mothers and children."

To many my age (57) and background (blue collar Catholics and others of our ilk) the censoring of Governor Bob Casey from the 1992 Democratic convention because of his support of the rights of all people - including our first neighbors in the womb - caused me to officially leave the Democratic Party.

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention that the Democratic Party leadership, in supporting the HHS Madate of the Affordable Care Act, has officially sided with those who deny the First Freedom of Religious Freedom to Catholics, other Christians and other people of good will. This rejection of the fundamental right to religious freedom is an egregious injustice and a rejection of the US Constitution and the Natural Law.  

However, it was the announcement of the lineup of speakers at the 2012 Democratic Convention which pushed me over the edge as both conventions draw near. I had to write. Cecile Richards, the President of Planned Parenthood and Nancy Keenan the President of the National Abortion Rights Action League, will have a place of prominence as speakers at the Democratic Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. 

I believe I made the correct decision all those years ago to leave that Party.

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online