Tag Archives: Colorado

Catholic Health Initiatives Argues in Court Against Personhood of the Unborn

Posted on by

Personhood

UPDATE: The bishops are on it! Hat-tip @MBartoloAbela

Alternet‘s Kaili Joy Gray has written a trashy and vile hit piece against the Catholic Church – “A Fetus Is Not a Person if it Costs us Money, Says Catholic Church.” Catholic Health Initiatives attorneys have, unfortunately, given Gray and other anti-Catholics an opportunity for gross misrepresentation of the Church by arguing against the personhood of the unborn in a malpractice suit.

From The Colorado Independent:

Catholic organizations have for decades fought to change federal and state laws that fail to protect “unborn persons,” and Catholic Health’s lawyers in this case had the chance to set precedent bolstering anti-abortion legal arguments. Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.

As Jason Langley, an attorney with Denver-based Kennedy Childs, argued in one of the briefs he filed for the defense, the court “should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses.”

These attorneys are not “the Church” speaking. It is Catholic Health Initiatives attorneys speaking and they need to be fired immediately. I have to say, though, that I was shocked to learn that this argument was actually made over two years ago, in 2010. In the first ruling handed down on the case, on behalf of Catholic Health Initiatives, Judge David Thorson wrote (.pdf):

The defendants argue that to be a ‘person’ one must at some point have been born alive.

“The defendents” are John Barry Pelner, M.D., Catholic Health Initiatives Colorado d/b/a St. Thomas More Hospital, and Pelham Porter Staples, III, M.D.

Jesus said:

My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me. — John 10:27

“The defendents” are not hearing the voice of Jesus here.

There are ignorant people in the Catholic Church just as there are brilliant people. There are saints and there are “bad Catholics” in the Church. There are competent people and incompetent people. The wheat and the weeds grow together, but the teaching of the Church is always consistent, despite the failures of human beings. Arguing against the personhood of the unborn child is not “Catholic,” no matter who is doing it. Any reasonably intelligent and educated person should be able to reason that out, so there is no excuse for these attorneys to be making that argument and there is no excuse for anyone to claim that this argument is “the Church” speaking.

There are two problems going on here. One is that these attorneys seem to be of the opinion that civil law trumps Church law when the two conflict. When an unjust law saves us money, it is not okay to agree with the unjust law. The second problem is that anti-Catholics like Gray use such failures as this to accuse “the Church” of hypocrisy, or of being interested primarily in money or, in Gray’s case, both things.

A woman and her two babies died, leaving behind a grieving father and daughter. The Church needs to settle this case in a manner where the family is taken care of in the way Jesus would want us to. We should all pray for this family and for everyone involved in this case so that this can happen as soon as possible. Meanwhile, it seems clear to me that lessons should be learned here, both in the area of preventing death and in ensuring attorneys representing Catholic institutions are not throwing the proverbial baby out with the bath water in our courts.

Photo: Georgia Right to Life

Colorado Civil Unions Bill Would Prompt Closure of Catholic Adoption Agencies

Posted on by

holyfamily

Here we go again. Catholics CANNOT place kids with same-sex couples. For this reason, same-sex civil unions and same-sex “marriage” legislation means Catholic adoption agencies close. We cannot disobey God to obey the State. Our fidelity to God trumps allegiance to the State….so the agencies close.

DFW Catholic:

Mark Rohlena, President and CEO of Catholic Charities of Central Colorado, said if the bill passes it could threaten the religious liberty of agencies like his that decline to place children with same-sex couples or unmarried opposite-sex couples.

“We feel it would be a very sad commentary if Colorado forced religious institutions or those who believe in a different framework to do something against their conscience,” he told CNA Jan. 16.

If Colorado law forces the Colorado Springs-based agency to violate Catholic teaching, he said, “we probably would cease the operation of our adoption programs.”

“That risk is always there,” he said. “I think that we would try to explore every avenue available to us to provide this vital service to the community.”

He said a shutdown is “very well what could happen” given precedents in other states.

For some reason, too many believe that forcing others to agree with you is “tolerance.” It is not “intolerant” of people of a certain faith background to refuse to place children with certain people. Just as it would not be “hatred of Catholics” for a Jewish adoption agency to refuse to place children with Catholic couples, it is not hatred for a Catholic adoption agency to refuse to place children with same-sex couples.

It seems clear that America is going to have to decide if orphans are better off with a Catholic couple or a same-sex couple. That’s the bottom line in this. Catholic adoption agencies cannot exist wherever the State pressures or forces the agencies to place kids with same-sex couples. It is one or the other. Either you want Catholic adoption agencies to be available…………or you want them to close. It is either/or, in this case, not both/and.

Photo: Holy Family statue, Cairlinn

Dear Media: There is a Big Fire in Colorado

Posted on by

From @911Buff on Twitter: #COLORADO U/D FRIGHTENING PHOTO OF HOMES UP IN FLAMES #WaldoCanyonFire FIRE STILL SPREADING VERY QUICK! #911BUFF

There is a fire in Colorado and I was struck by this note from my friend Jennifer Warhawk:

It completely amazes me that politics is still going on in the rest of the nation…I’m so preoccupied with Waldo Canyon Fire that I’ve forgotten the rest of the world even still exists. The national media isn’t covering our little disaster here though, so no wonder.

Currently, the entire West side of our city is burning to the ground. I just can’t fathom it.

When the ice storm hit Kentucky in 2009, it was the worst natural disaster our state had ever known. Being a disabled single mom in a rural area, I knew it was best for us just to get out of here after the first “wave” of ice hit. We evacuated to a hotel in Tennessee. Most did not have that luxury. Half a million people were without power and 200,000 were without water. Many of these had to live without water and electricity for several days..and it was very cold.

In our hotel room, I kept the television news on, waiting for reports on this disaster, but there was no coverage anywhere except on the Weather Channel. The only other coverage I could find was in the conservative blogosphere, mainly from MichelleMalkin who is now, herself, impacted by the Colorado fire. See here, here and here for some articles she wrote on the Kentucky ice storm. That coverage showed me who Michelle Malkin is, and I’ll always be grateful to her.

Right Reborn wrote (rightly):

Kentucky Ice Storm – Let the Republicans Freeze to Death

President Obama was hanging out at a Super Bowl party while hundreds of thousands of Kentucky residents sat in darkness trying not to freeze to death.  It was Obama who repeatedly ridiculed President Bush throughout the campaign season, putting the brunt of the blame on Bush for the less than stellar response to Hurricane Katrina.

Here below is the KEY POINT.

Once again, the hypocritical, lying nature of the left is revealed. 

Kentucky is a red state. It almost always votes Republican in the presidential races and most Congressional districts are solidly Republican seats. This is the state that elected Rand Paul to the U.S. Senate. But here’s the thing, folks. The part of us that agrees with Rand Paul on things is (mainly) the same part that is appalled by the hypocrisy of those who use some disasters (like Hurricane Katrina) to drive wedges between people, as they claim to be the party of “compassion” while they IGNORE the sufferings of those who disagree with them. The main difference between Hurricane Katrina and the Kentucky ice storm is that the people of New Orleans knew they essentially live in a “bowl” between the Gulf and Lake Pontchartrain and they had several days of national news coverage showing that a major hurricane was headed their way, and Kentuckians did not have the luxury of TIME. We had only a matter of a few hours to get our minds around the fact that this ice monster was hitting us.

It’s the HYPOCRISY of the Left and the fact that the national media drives the national dialogue based on what the Left wants people to be talking about that is so appalling to me. We didn’t particularly want the federal government coming in and “dictating” things for us. Kentucky is a tough state. My ancestors, like many others, came here from other states, with Daniel Boone. We are Kentuckians, and Kentuckians take care of Kentuckians. Nearby states were better able to help us, and help us they did! We are grateful. Unfortunately, our governor is a Democrat and he seemed to me to have been more interested in the image of the Democratic party than in the needs of Kentuckians during that time. But, like my great great grandfather, we are not whiners here in Kentucky, so you won’t really ever get a good idea of how bad it was and how great the suffering was during that time.

Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter Issues Pro-Homosexuality Letter of Dissent Against Bishops

Posted on by

A rose for the bishops.

At the Denver Post, former Colorado governor Bill Ritter, Jr., has written a letter of dissent against the Catholic bishops in response to their decision to pull funding from and organization that aligns itself with the “gay rights” movement.

Mr. Ritter writes:

Compañeros may lose its funding from the bishops’ Catholic Campaign for Human Development because it also happens to be a member of a statewide coalition of immigrants rights organizations that has opposed discrimination based on sexual orientation. 

Mr. Ritter is incorrect to claim that this funding decision was made because of the issue of discrimination in immigration. Rather, at least according to the Denver Post, the very paper in which Mr. Ritter’s letter appears, the organization is affiliated with a group that supports same-sex unions, a legal position which poses a direct threat to the freedom of the Church.

While CIRC’s stated focus is advocacy for the rights of all immigrants and refugees, one of its affiliates is One Colorado, which supports civil unions for gays.

Further, the CIRC was given a choice by the Church. They could choose between funding from the Church and their affiliation with groups opposed to the Church. They decided to reject the funding from the Church.

The Compañeros board, after much discussion, recently voted to remain a member of CIRC despite the threat of defunding.

They’ve made their decision. Now, let them live with it.

Of course, I don’t really expect Mr. Ritter to understand the religious freedom issue considering that, as governor, he mandated that Catholic hospitals provide information about abortifacient drugs. His claim (in the headline) that this decision to de-fund is a “departure from the Church’s mission” is unfortunate and ironic considering that legal recognition of same-sex unions very directly crushes the Church’s mission.

The Name ‘Santorum’ Now Redefined: It Means ‘American Comeback’

Posted on by

“Gay rights” activists have tried to redefine the name “Santorum” to be synonymous with something children should never hear. Though Santorum’s positions on social issues are really not so different from other Republican candidates, his authenticity has made him a threat not just to the Left, but also to Republicans who lack authenticity on issues dealing with life and marriage. The latter have tried to redefine Rick Santorum as “the social issues candidate” despite the fact that, in reality, he is authentically conservative across the board. This effort to “redefine Santorum” has turned out to be a miserable failure. Last night’s election results demonstrated that very loudly and clearly. Today, “Santorum” means “American Comeback.”

From Politico (via Memeorandum):

Just in case the 2012 Republican primary race hasn’t already had enough twists and turns – welcome back, Rick Santorum.

After winning Tuesday’s non-binding contests in Missouri and Minnesota by thumping margins, bruising Mitt Romney and proving again that the GOP base isn’t ready to embrace their national front-runner, the former Pennsylvania senator has dramatically resuscitated a campaign that was bordering on irrelevant.

It was a sweep. Santorum won in Colorado, too.

As a social conservative, I would very much like to sit here and tell you that it was Rick’s social conservatism that put him over the top last night, but it was not that. It’s not because Rick is “the social issues” candidate that he won last night. No, he won because he is an across-the-board conservative. Rick wrote a book explaining that social conservatism and fiscal conservatism are intimately connected: It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good.

While Santorum “wrote a book” on that topic, it would not be fair to those whose shoulders we stand on — like Ronald Reagan, for example — if we did not acknowledge that these are things conservatives have always known. Unless families are strong, government gets bigger. Rick Santorum’s “bold solutions for America’s families” are specifically designed for an American comeback that includes everyone.

Couple this with Santorum’s record of being against bailouts, Obamacare and Cap and Trade, while other candidates have been incredibly weak in defending conservative values in those areas, and it should not be too difficult to figure out. American voters are more like Rick Santorum than anyone else running because American voters know exactly what it will take for an American comeback.

Congratulations, Rick, on redefining “Santorum”.