Life Site News

The ultraconservative website LifeSiteNews today is boasting that Ken Cuccinelli, the Attorney General of Virginia and a leading candidate for Governor, told a gathering of activists from groups such as the American Life League and the Campaign Life Coalition, which founded LifeSiteNews, that he uses the website as part of his anti-choice activism:

Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is one of the rising stars on the national pro-life stage – and he reads and supports LifeSiteNews.com.

LifeSiteNews.com is “the homepage for one of the computers in our house,” the eloquent lawyer and former Virginia state senator told a gathering of influential members of the pro-life movement at the website’s 15 anniversary gala in Herndon, Virginia, on April 28. During his 20-minute speech to a special VIP event before the banquet dinner, he said to advocates for the unborn, “You’ve got to have the tools, the information. That’s what you get from LifeSiteNews.”

He said that often when reading the website’s stories he says to himself, “I haven’t read this anywhere else.”

“I’m very appreciative of that fact,” he said. “And we use it. And we’ve learned from it.”

…

He closed by thanking LifeSiteNews.com founder Steve Jalsevac by name and “all the reporters…for the work you all do to give us that ammunition to convert the other side in the battle we’re in for life.”

This is the same website that demanded the Catholic Church excommunicate Democratic politicians, maintained that feminists were to blame for the Costa Concordia disaster, compares gays and lesbians to pagans and fervently supports ex-gay ‘reparative’ therapy. Jalsevac even asked for donations to promote “freedom from the homosexual lifestyle”:

With the enthusiastic help of the rich, the powerful, and the famous, and the all-too-willing mainstream media, the tactics of the “gay pride” agenda are proving to be frighteningly successful - to the detriment of the family, traditional sexual ethics…and our freedoms.

Have no doubt about it. Many gay rights activists are not satisfied with mere “tolerance” - they want acceptance, even if it tramples on our basic rights. Already we are seeing devout Christians losing jobs, being fined, and being ostracized, simply for speaking up in defense of the family.

…

As I was standing watching Sunday’s Gay Pride parade, I was filled with sadness for all the lost, confused souls who were participating in it.

The fact is, despite the unprecedented levels of social acceptance for homosexuality, the gay community continues to be plagued by soaring levels of deadly sexually transmitted diseases, drug abuse, depression, and suicide. And no wonder!

We know that only God can provide the peace and happiness for which we all crave. What could be more opposed to this than the promiscuous gay lifestyle?

As our editor-in-chief, John-Henry Westen, wrote last week, it isn’t acceptance that homosexuals need. It’s freedom from the homosexual lifestyle, and all its dangers and miseries.

…

So please, for our culture, our children, and for the homosexuals themselves, who are in need of God’s love and freedom from the homosexual lifestyle, please consider making a donation to LSN today.

It appears that for the Religious Right, simply criticizing their anti-gay activism strips them of their freedoms. Echoing Kirk Cameron’s claim that his freedom of speech and religion are jeopardized by negative responses to his claim that homosexuality is “destructive,” David Krayden of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies writes on LifeSiteNews that GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, is a “totalitarian” organization because it denounced Cameron. Of course, Krayden never shows how organizations that have decried Cameron are taking away any of Cameron or anyone else’s freedoms. He also claims that “the current trend towards acceptance and promotion of homosexual behaviour is in itself a throwback to the attitudes and opinions of ancient pagan civilizations,” and argued that supporters of the “gay agenda” are “completely at odds with basic democratic freedoms.”

The remarks engendered a swift counterattack by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), which apparently is unaware that Cameron has continued to work as an actor and producer since he was a featured player on the sitcom Growing Pains. Said GLAAD’s senior director of programs Herndon Graddick, “In this interview, Kirk Cameron sounds even more dated than his 1980s TV character. Cameron is out of step with a growing majority of Americans, particularly people of faith who believe that their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters should be loved and accepted based on their character and not condemned because of their sexual orientation.”

OK, so you would not expect an organization that is actively pushing the gay agenda to either ignore Cameron’s comments or even to agree to disagree. Cameron said nothing about not loving gays and lesbians, but for GLAAD, anyone not of the fervent conviction that homosexuality is as natural as the rain falling is trapped in a medieval mindset and hopelessly out of step with progressive thought.

But does being “out of date” have anything to do with being right or wrong on an issue? For that matter, one could say that the current trend towards acceptance and promotion of homosexual behaviour is in itself a throwback to the attitudes and opinions of ancient pagan civilizations where same-sex couplings were not only an acceptable part of sexual expression but embedded in religious rites.

The demands of GLAAD and other similarly focussed groups that Christians accept homosexual activity may well be a rooted in the approval of that distant coupling of sex and religion, in a desire to have organized religion today sanction that behaviour just as it was in the distant past by pagan cultures. GLAAD desires a return to a religious conformity that might well be described as strangely nostalgic.

The “people of faith” that Graddick describes as accepting any sexual orientation must surely belong, as far as Biblically-based Christianity is concerned, to any apostate church that flatly rejects the clear moral dictates that may be found in preponderance in both the Old and New Testaments. Furthermore, since “sexual orientation” is a term that can describe anything, and therefore ultimately means nothing, do we really believe that any sexual urge may be satiated, that any sexual calling must be applauded, that any sexual – dare we say – perversion is permissible?

Clearly we have reached a new level in society’s attitudes towards homosexuality. The yardstick of political correctness has subtly but undeniably been stretched from tolerance to acceptance to promotion – and now it is insistence, insistence that religious opinion and “people of faith” accept the homosexual lifestyle without question, without remorse, without further comments—especially to networks like CNN. At least no one – yet – is suggesting that Cameron should not be allowed to work in films because his opinions are too odious and corrosive for public viewing.

This insistence is profoundly totalitarian in scope and intent while being completely at odds with basic democratic freedoms – in particular a certain freedom which we used to have called freedom of religion. No one can demand that people think in a certain way or that the only acceptable “people of faith” are the ones who won’t disagree or “condemn” your lifestyle choices.

In the world of Religious Right activists, waging a campaign to convince the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation to cut funding to breast cancer exams at Planned Parenthood clinics is an admirable exercise of public advocacy, but when people join a campaign to convince the Komen foundation to continue their partnership with Planned Parenthood to fight breast cancer, it’s “gangsterism.”

After Komen released a statement that opened the door to maintain its ties to the women’s health organization, Planned Parenthood said it is “heartened that we can continue to work in partnership toward our shared commitment to breast health for the most underserved women” and “enormously grateful that the Komen Foundation has clarified its grantmaking criteria.”

The uproar not only resulted in a huge black eye to Komen but also helped Planned Parenthood raise over $3 million to protect their breast health program from cuts. Moreover, the controversy exposed the Religious Right’s unabashed glee that tens of thousands of women would lose access to breast exams and gave them another opportunity to rekindle the debunked claim that abortion is linked to breast cancer.

But their excitement at women losing access to cancer screenings seems to be fading with the new statement from Komen.

Mona Charen of the National Review Online lamented that “it’s extremely disappointing that Komen has caved” but “it’s hardly surprising given the onslaught they’ve endured over the course of the last few days,” and NRO’s Daniel Foster charged Planned Parenthood with “gangsterism.” Of course, just days prior Kathryn Jean Lopez on NRO hailed Komen’s initial decision as a major victory, noting “this Komen-Planned Parenthood relationship has long been a target of pro-life activists.”

Catholic Family and Human Rights Initiative (C-Fam) president Austin Ruse told LifeSiteNews called potentially successful effort to have the Komen foundation reverse their decision defunding Planned Parenthood a “mafia shakedown”:

Pro-life leaders say that the exact import of the statement is not yet clear, and that Komen seems to be asking for breathing room, possibly with the intention of caving in definitively to pro-abortion pressure.

Austin Ruse of C-Fam told LifeSiteNews.com Friday morning that, “The mafia shakedown tactics may have worked, but we’re not sure.”

Ruse advised that pro-lifers should “take a wait and see attitude” to discern whether the pro-abortion pushback against Komen would succeed.

Kristen Walker of Live Action called it a “terrible shame that Komen has caved in to political pressure from pro-abortion fanatics who demand obeisance to Planned Parenthood” and wondered what will happen to all the money people gave to Komen to reward them for dropping Planned Parenthood:

If raising money to cure breast cancer were their primary concern, they would not have reversed this decision. Their donations went up 100% in the short time since they announced the halting of grants to PP as pro-lifers who have refused to donate to Komen opened their wallets to thank them for their decision, happy to finally be able to give to their good work of fighting breast cancer with a clear conscience. I wonder if Komen has given any thought to the fact that those people gave money in good faith believing it wouldn’t be used to fund abortions. Will they refund that money? I guess we’ll see.

…

It is a terrible shame that Komen has caved in to political pressure from pro-abortion fanatics who demand obeisance to Planned Parenthood. It is a terrible shame they’re allowing PP and its followers to compromise their mission to cure breast cancer.

Evangelist Bill Keller warned that the latest move by the Komen foundation may well lead to “the wrath and punishment of God unleashed on this wicked nation at any moment”:

Keller said, "It only shows the level of spiritual decay in this nation when a private foundation who made a decision to stop giving money to the world's largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, causes the media, politicians, and the supporters of killing babies to go into a wild frenzy. The Catholic Church has always stood for the sanctity of life, yet Catholics like Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Joe Biden, and MSNBC's Chris Matthews, were livid that the Komen Foundation decided to stop giving a $250,000 annual grant to Planned Parenthood."

…

Keller concluded, "You don't have to be a Biblical scholar to know that we are on the verge of seeing the wrath and punishment of God unleashed on this wicked nation at any moment. Every 24 hours we slaughter approximately 4,000 innocent babies. Where is the outrage about that in the media, in the halls of Congress? Sadly, society doesn't even give it a second thought and has fully embraced this 'culture of death' which hangs over this nation like a black cloud."

UPDATE: Liberty Counsel Action is now urging its members to cancel any donations they made to Komen, with Matt Barber arguing that the group should change their name to “Susan G. Komen for the Cause,” pushing the discredited charge that abortion is linked to breast cancer:

The reversal comes on the heels of news that Komen’s donations jumped 100% after deciding to defund Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion provider that is currently under criminal investigation in multiple venues. Liberty Counsel Action is encouraging its members to cancel any checks and credit card contributions made in the wake of Komen’s initial decision to defund Planned Parenthood and asking any pro-life participants in Komen’s June 2 Global Race for the Cure run in Washington, D.C. to withdraw.

Matt Barber, Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action, says that anyone who sincerely wants to contribute to the fight against breast cancer has dozens if not hundreds of other options from hospitals to other nonprofit organizations, but Komen should be off the list.

“It’s a sad day for those who both seek a breast cancer cure and who respect the dignity of all human life,” said Barber. “Susan G. Komen for the Cure should recognize that abortion is not a cure for anything. Perhaps they should change the name to Susan G. Komen for the Cause. What a tragic paradox. There is mounting medical evidence that indicates abortion significantly increases the risk for breast cancer.”

Calling Komen’s decision “the coward’s way out,” Barber said that the decision to once again partner with Planned Parenthood was nothing more than capitulation to “tremendous left-wing political pressure.”

“They have chosen death over life – cancer over cure,” said Barber. “Instead of showing courage, they caved. Komen is now part of the breast cancer problem rather than the solution.”

Gerard Nadal, a columnist for the anti-choice and anti-gay website Life Site News, is infuriated that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Catholic, signed a marriage equality bill into law. He calls on Roman Catholic bishops to get tough on the “sins of the Ted Kennedys, Andrew Cuomos and Nancy Pelosis” and all “Catholic pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage politicians,” insisting that they be refused communion and eventually excommunicated. Nadal believes that only religious pressure can compel a progressive politician to “undo their grave injustices” of supporting reproductive rights and marriage equality:

The sins of the Ted Kennedys, Andrew Cuomos and Nancy Pelosis are so vast, so deeply rooted, and entirely the fabric of the Democrat Party, that any confession by these people needs to have a public recanting of their deeds and concrete evidence of an action plan to undo them as the penance. If the politician is unwilling to work within the political system to undo their grave injustices and work toward a restoration of justice under law, then they are not contrite.

We have run out the rope on the excuse by so many bishops that we don’t know the private state of their souls. That simply strains credulity. If the politicians remain the same week after week, month after month, year after year, then as we say in Brooklyn, that’s a clue.

It’s a clue to their impenitence, and it is a sin against charity to confirm them in their impenitence by allowing them to eat and drink condemnation upon themselves, as Saint Paul put it.

As I’ve said before on this blog, if the fight was “too political” for the bishops in the past, the threat is now existential going into the future. The faithful are enraged over this law, and the bishops have a once-in-a-generation opportunity here to publicly call upon Catholic pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage politicians to publicly repent or face severe sanctions, beginning with being barred from the Eucharist, and leading to excommunication. There is a small window of opportunity here to reclaim the leadership most have eschewed for far too long.

For great good, or great evil, this is an historical moment for the United States Bishops in general, and New York’s bishops in particular. This is the great moment where the bishops can define what it means to be a Catholic in terms of sacramentality, and how to be a Catholic in the public square. This is the time for a muscular response. The faithful will back them to the hilt.