The Anti-Catholic Roots Of Roe V. Wade

The following article has been adapted by Catholic League president Bill Donohue from a 2001 lengthy article written by Robert P. Lockwood, "NARAL, Anti-Catholicism & the Roots of the Pro-Abortion Campaign"; it is available on our website.

At that time, Bob was our Director of Research. He was former president and publisher of Our Sunday Visitor and a member of the Catholic League's board of directors. He died in 2019. 

The public debate over abortion was critical in a resurgent anti-Catholicism in the mid-1960s. With the cooperation of media, abortion became an ongoing battle waged in a war of words based on anti-Catholicism. The issue was quickly defined as Catholicism and its role in public life, rather than abortion itself. 

When the Catholic Church hierarchy took a strong stand on abortion, it found itself the target, rather than the position espoused. Quickly, the public issue of whether or not abortion should be fully legal in the United States descended into a cauldron of unrelated issues of separation of Church and State, the Catholic Church's tax exempt status, the religious affiliation of abortion opponents, alleged "Catholic power," and the imposition of sectarian belief on American law. As one New York state legislator would thunder in the midst of abortion debate, "you have no right to come to the floor of this body and ask us to enact into law church doctrine." 

Why did Catholicism become the issue in the abortion debate? It was through a planned effort by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. Called by the acronym NARAL, the organization began as a collective of pro-abortion groups, nascent feminist organizations, illegal abortion referral services, and various Zero Population Growth zealots in the late 1960s. 

One of the primary motivations in NARAL's abortion campaign was the anti-Catholicism of its founder and first executive director, Lawrence J. Lader. Lader would effectively harness and use anti-Catholicism as a fundamental aspect of NARAL in abortion politics, legislating, public debate and media coverage. Under the influence of Lader and NARAL, Catholicism would become the issue, as much as abortion itself. According to Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of NARAL's original members and a close confidant of Lader, this anti-Catholicism "was probably the most effective strategy we had." 

According to Nathanson, he and Lader were discussing the overall strategy for legalizing abortion in the United States in October, 1967, six years before the Supreme Court would knock down all state laws that criminalized abortion in its Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions and two years before the formation of NARAL. 

After Lader described the need to activate feminist leadership to see abortion as not one of many issues but a foundational part of the feminist crusade, Lader – as recalled by Nathanson – "brought out his favorite whipping boy": 

"'…(A)nd the other thing we've got to do is bring the Catholic hierarchy out where we can fight them. That's the real enemy. The biggest single obstacle to peace and decency throughout all of history.' 

"It was a comprehensive and chilling indictment of the poisonous influence of Catholicism in secular affairs from its inception until the day before yesterday. I was far from an admirer of the church's role in the world chronicle, but his insistent, uncompromising recitation brought to mind the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It passed through my mind that if one had substituted 'Jewish' for 'Catholic,' it would have been the most vicious anti-Semitic tirade imaginable.'" 

As Lader would amplify in a later conversation, "every revolution has to have a villain…There's always been one group of people in this country associated with reactionary politics, behind-the-scenes manipulation, socially backward ideas…(I)ts got to be the Catholic hierarchy." 

Under Lader's leadership, NARAL would quickly move to make the abortion debate appear to be a "Catholic" issue. The strategy was simple: convince the media and the public that this was a case of the Catholic hierarchy attempting to impose its will on America. 

Portray all opposition from Catholics to legalized abortion as a power play by the Church with the laity marching in lockstep to its clerical overlords. Accuse the Church of abusing its tax exemption for a political power-grab. Secure the right to unlimited access to abortion by painting the pro-life position as a peculiarly Catholic notion with no rights in a pluralistic society. Pull out all the old anti-Catholic canards and focus the debate as a church-state issue. 

This was the anti-Catholicism of Lawrence Lader and an infant NARAL. It would use the old nativist anti-Catholic arguments that had visceral appeal throughout American culture – the Church as authoritarian and undemocratic; the Church as an alien presence within American democracy; the Church as the enemy of separation of Church and State; the Church as attempting to impose its morality on American culture; Catholic laity as political foot-soldiers dominated by a hierarchy and incapable of individual thought – and strip them of post-Reformation theological rhetoric. Rather than a religious and racial prejudice, anti-Catholicism in the abortion debate would become a secular assumption. The pro-life position was wrong because it was Catholic, not because it necessarily lacked merit. 

As Nathanson explained, in liberal circles anti-Catholicism would become a very effective tool. It still is, many decades later. 

Nathanson later gave up his abortion practice, became pro-life and converted to Catholicism.

 

Here is a List of Bishops Speaking Out in Support of Archbishop Cordileone

CV NEWS FEED // After Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone announced Friday that he is barring House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, from receiving Communion in her home Archdiocese of San Francisco, a growing number of other American bishops and archbishops have voiced their support for the decision.

As of May 27, 18 prominent Catholic churchmen have indicated their support for Cordileone.

Archbishop Joseph Fred Naumann, Archdiocese of Kansas City, KS

Archbishop Joseph Naumann, a previous chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, issued this statement the same day Cordileone announced his decision regarding Pelosi:

I applaud Archbishop Cordileone’s patient and persevering efforts to enlighten Speaker Pelosi about the moral gravity of her extreme efforts to promote, to advocate and to initiate legislation to enshrine legalized abortion into federal law. I fully support the both pastoral and courageous actions that Archbishop Cordileone has now taken in an effort to awaken Speaker Pelosi’s conscience and at the same time to protect Catholics in the Archdiocese of San Francisco and throughout the country from being confused by Speaker Pelosi’s radical support for abortion, while claiming to be a faithful Catholic. I pray that Speaker Pelosi will have a change of heart.

Bishop Donald Hying, Diocese of Madison, WI

The Diocese of Madison issued a statement from Bishop Donald Hying regarding what the Diocese called “Nancy Pelosi’s choice to separate herself from full communion with the Catholic Church.”

“I fully support Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone’s prudent decision to recognize that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, has persistently taken public positions in support of legal abortion, contrary to her professed Catholic faith, choosing to separate herself from full communion with the Catholic Church, and therefore is not to present herself for the reception of Holy Communion in the Archdiocese of San Francisco,” Hying stated:

Archbishop Cordileone’s public statement made it clear that this serious measure is ‘purely pastoral, not political’ in a further attempt ‘to help her understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, and the danger to her own soul she is risking…’ This is not a decision that was made rashly, but rather one made after almost ten years of patient dialogue and repeated attempts at reconciliation with the congresswoman and the consistently held teachings of the Catholic Church. Please join me in prayer for Speaker Pelosi, that she may embrace the sacred truth and dignity of the human person, formed in the womb, in the image of God.

Archbishop Samuel Aquila, Archdiocese of Denver, CO

“I support and commend my brother bishop for making this courageous, compassionate, and necessary decision,” wrote Archbishop Samuel Aquila in a statement Friday. “I know Archbishop Cordileone to be a shepherd with the heart and mind of Christ, who truly desires to lead others towards Christ’s love, mercy, and promise of eternal salvation.”

“He has made every attempt to try and avoid this step,” Aquila added.

Bishop Joseph Strickland, Diocese of Tyler, TX

Bishop Joseph Strickland posted a report on Archbishop Cordileone’s decision on social media, adding: “Thank you, Thank you, Thank you Archbishop Cordileone for loving Nancy Pelosi in the Truth of Jesus Christ!”

“Now may every bishop follow the lead of [Archbishop Cordileone] & make it clear that elected leaders who vehemently speak against the sanctity of life must be strongly corrected & if Catholic admonished to live their faith,” Strickland added.

Bishop James Conley, Diocese of Lincoln, NE

“I support Archbishop Cordileone in his courageous pastoral outreach to a member of his flock. His actions are made as a shepherd with the heart of Christ,” wrote Bishop James Conley:

We fervently pray for a conversion of heart for Speaker Pelosi and for all those who advocate for the destruction of human life in the womb. Let us pray that all people recognize the dignity of every human soul: man, woman and child, born and unborn.

Bishop Robert Vasa, Diocese of Santa Rosa, CA

Bishop Robert Vasa, “the bishop of the California diocese where Pelosi has a vacation home,” said Friday that “he will uphold the prohibition when Pelosi attends Mass in his diocese,” the Pillar reported:

Bishop Robert Vasa of the Diocese of Santa Rosa told The Pillar May 20 he has instructed priests to observe the decision of Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone when Pelosi attends Mass at the parish nearby her Napa Valley vacation home and vineyard. 

“I have visited with the pastor at [Pelosi’s parish] and informed him that if the Archbishop prohibited someone from receiving Holy Communion then that restriction followed the person and that the pastor was not free to ignore it,” Vasa said in a statement provided to The Pillar by the Santa Rosa diocese.

Bishop Michael C. Barber, SJ, Diocese of Oakland, CA

“I support [Archbishop Cordileone] in the heroic and compassionate stance he took today in the protection and defense of human life,” wrote Michael Bishop Barber on Friday. “As Pope Francis said, ‘Every child who, rather than being born, is condemned unjustly to being aborted, bears the face of Jesus Christ.'”

Archbishop Paul S. Coakley, Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, OK

“I applaud the courage of Archbishop Cordileone and his leadership in taking this difficult step,” wrote Archbishop Paul S. Coakley on Friday:

Let us continue to pray for Abp. Cordileone, priests of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, Speaker Pelosi, for the protection of the unborn, and for the conversion of hearts and minds.

Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Diocese of Springfield, IL

Bishop Thomas Paprocki on Friday wrote:

I fully support and earnestly commend Archbishop Cordileone’s action in regard to Speaker Pelosi. All politicians who promote abortion should not receive holy Communion until they have repented, repaired scandal, and been reconciled to Christ and the Church.

Bishop David Ricken, Diocese of Green Bay, WI

“I wish to express my strong support for Archbishop Cordileone’s decision stating he has publicly declared that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi not be admitted to Holy Communion,” tweeted Bishop David Ricken on Friday:

Speaker Pelosi’s aggressive promotion of abortion and blatant public disregard for Church teaching has consequences. In many ways, she has made this choice herself through her words and actions. Despite repeated pastoral outreach by the Archbishop, his clear teaching on the dignity of each human life, and specific letters and requests to meet personally with Speaker Pelosi, she has chosen not to respond. Let us continue to pray for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s conversion and a greater respect for life in our country.

Bishop Liam Cary, Diocese of Baker, OR

“Representative Nancy Pelosi proudly combines ‘devout’ practice of Catholic faith in her personal life with high-profile promotion of legalized abortion in her political life,” wrote Bishop Liam Cary in a statement Friday. “The scandalizing gap between belief and behavior on the part of the Speaker of the House grievously misleads her fellow believers about Catholic teaching on social justice and seriously handicaps Catholic efforts to defend unborn life in the womb.”

Cary went on to point out Cordileones repeated pastoral efforts to discuss the matter with Pelosi, which she rebuffed. Cordileone’s notification to Pelosi set “conditions [that] invite Representative Pelosi’s return to Communion and show her the way to do so on the Church’s terms, not her own,” Cary wrote. “May our merciful Lord grant her the grace to accept them. May He strengthen Archbishop Cordileone to walk the path of courage with confidence.”

Bishop Thomas Daly, Diocese of Spokane, WA

“After many attempts to engage speaker Nancy Pelosi in a conversation about her support for abortion, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone has announced that speaker Pelosi is to refrain from receiving holy communion until she answers the call to repentance,” tweeted Bishop Thomas Daly on Saturday morning. “I fully support Archbishop Cordileone. No bishop enjoys making these decisions but we are all bound to teach the truth with love, compassion and without compromise.”

Bishop Michael F. Olson, Diocese of Fort Worth, TX

“Please join me in praying for [Archbishop Cordileone] for his protection during these times as he shepherds all of his flock with perseverance and fortitude,” wrote Bishop Michael Olson on Saturday afternoon. “Please pray for the ongoing conversion of [Speaker Pelosi] and for others who place themselves at odds with the Gospel of Life.”

Bishop James S. Wall, Diocese of Gallup, NM

Bishop James Wall has approvingly shared Cordileone’s message to the faithful about Pelosi with followers on social media.

Bishop Emeritus Michael D. Pfeifer, OMI, Diocese of San Angelo, TX

Bishop Emeritus Michael Pfeifer wrote a letter of support to Cordileone. “Dear Archbishop Salvatore,” Pfeifer wrote:

I thank you for the good and important pastoral decision you have made as regards denying communion to Pelosi. You have taken the proper courageous moral decision, for her good and for the entire Body of Christ. Several months ago when we spoke on the phone you indicated that you had discussed this matter with her. How can Pelosi hold to a clear immoral position on the precious unborn? What we have always believed from sacred scriptures, and from the teaching of our beautiful Catholic church, especially with the beautiful letter of Pope St. John Paul II, on the sacredness and dignity of the unborn, that they are true human beings, human persons from the moment of conception, has now been confirmed by medical science. I was pleased to read that other American bishops and archbishops have voiced their support for this decision. I add my voice supporting your decision. How I wish though that even more brother bishops would follow your courageous pastoral decision, in this matter, and even with our president who claims to be a good Catholic, and many other Catholic politicians. You are a wonderful Christ like leader for God’s people.

Bishop Michael Burbidge, Diocese of Arlington, VA

Bishop Michael Burbidge said he would uphold Cordileone’s decision in the diocese of Arlington, VA, which borders the nation’s capital. “Speaker Pelosi has been actively pro-abortion for years and years and years, so for the archbishop to make this decision now demonstrates that he did what he could, but felt that she had no desire to align with Church teaching. I trust that he did everything possible,” said Burbidge. “I would respect the decision of Archbishop Cordileone and be consistent with that decision here in the Diocese of Arlington, should that situation occur.”

Bishop Thomas Tobin, Diocese of Providence, RI

“Archbishop Cordileone has written a thoughtful, well-reasoned and compassionate letter that accurately reflects the teaching and the law of the Church. I fully support the Archbishop’s statement,” said Bishop Thomas Tobin in a May 23 statement.

Archbishop Alexander Sample, Archdiocese of Portland, OR

“The grave significance of receiving Holy Communion should not be underestimated. It’s spiritually dangerous to approach the awesome power of God in Holy Communion with anything less than the respect it demands,” said Archbishop Alexander Sample in a May 27 video statement:

…What Archbishop Cordileone did was actually an act of pastoral love and care for Speaker Pelosi, and for all those entrusted to his pastoral care who might have been led astray by her public support of the evil of abortion. That’s why what Archbishop Cordileone did was the right thing.

Vandalism of pregnancy centers continues across US with new incidents

Vandalism of pregnancy centers continues across US with new incidents: A Seattle-area crisis pregnancy center was tagged with graffiti and vandalized in the early morning hours of May 25. In addition to the red paint, at least five of the front windows of Next Step Pregnancy Center in Lynnwood, Washington were smashed.

Faith On Trial’s weekly program May 25, 2022

Here is a link to today’s program, our discussion with Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org. We discussed the current shootings and San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone’s decision to ban House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from Holy Communion:

https://www.iowacatholicradio.com/faith/episode/2cd88740/faith-on-trial-archbishop-salvatore-cordileone-and-nancy-pelosi-brian-burch-5262022

Faith On Trial airs every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Iowa Catholic Radio, 1150 AM and 94.5 FM Des Moines; 88.5 FM Adel, and 90.9 FM Creston, or catch it streaming on IowaCatholicRadio.com where you can find podcasts of our older programs that you may have missed.

Pelosi is at war with the Catholic Church

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proved to be insubordinate, continuously rebuffing her bishop, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, she was told not to present herself for Communion. Now she has gone on MSNBC to say that not only is he wrong, the entire Church is wrong. She said the Church is wrong about abortion, gay and transgender issues, contraception and in vitro fertilization.

There is not a single Church teaching on women, marriage, the family or sexuality that Pelosi accepts, so out of touch is she with the Catholic Church. There are atheists who agree more with the Church on these issues than she does.

To top it off, she has the audacity to say that she is against imposing her views on others.

Yet she tried to force her pro-abortion views down the throats of the Little Sisters of the Poor, mandating that they pay for abortion-inducing drugs in their healthcare plans. She is a strong proponent of the Equality Act and other measures that would impose her radical pro-abortion views on Catholic doctors and hospitals. She would also coerce Catholic doctors to perform immoral surgeries against their will.

Pelosi is at war with the Catholic Church.

No Holy Communion for Speaker Pelosi: Next FOT

Last week San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone banned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who claims to be a devout Catholic, from receiving Holy Communion in the archdiocese. The archbishop made his decision on Ms. Pelosi’s consistent support for the expansion of abortion. Enforcement of that decree outside the archdiocese is left to the local bishops and while several have suggested they will follow the archbishop’s lead, others have indicated they will not. How will this decision affect the Church and the larger secular society? Joining Deacon Mike and Gina to discuss this question will be Brian Burch, president of Catholic Vote.

Faith On Trial is heard every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Iowa Catholic Radio, 1150 AM and 94.5 FM Des Moines; 88.5 FM Adel, and 90.9 FM Creston, or catch it streaming on IowaCatholicRadio.com where you can find podcasts of our older programs that you may have missed.

Dumbing down equitably

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – One of the matters that has occupied this column over the years is that of the state of our public schools, and education in general. Lately, we have seen a nearly unprecedented public interest in what is happening in our schools and to our children. That wasn’t so a few years back when I began this column.

Fortunately, however, public attention has been focused more and more on education recently. This is due to a number of factors, most notably those things that the public never saw or appreciated until now. Part of this is due to the pandemic, which forced the closure of many schools.

Now, combine that with parents watching their kids’ lessons on home computers and reacting — to their horror — that schools were not only teaching something called critical race theory, but also about the joys of alternative lifestyles and how one could be transformed from a boy to a girl, or to nothing at all. Combine that with the obstinate refusal of the teachers’ unions to cut parents any quarter and you have a brand new Pandora’s Box opening right before your eyes.

We’ve talked a lot in this column about the pitfalls of critical race theory, how it came about, why it exists, and why it should be thrown on the ash-can of history. We’ll probably be talking about it in other columns. But for today I’d like to concentrate on something I brought up back in 2018, a 1961 short story by Kurt Vonnegut called Harrison Bergeron.

Now, in case you have forgotten, and why should you have remembered, it is set in a future America in which the government has declared that every person is fully equal in all respects: equal in intelligence, in beauty, and in skills. In order to facilitate this policy the government provides artificial handicaps for those who are too smart, pretty, or skilled in order to equalize all persons.

Overseen by Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, handicaps are provided for those needing them. Those who are too smart have ear plugs that pounded radio sounds into their heads so they can’t optimize their intelligence; graceful ballerinas are provided foot weights so they can perform no better than average, and the beautiful have masks so as to appear no more beautiful than the ugly or disfigured.

Thus the best, the brightest, and the most intelligent are handicapped to attain the goal of total equality. In the story Harrison Bergeron sheds his handicaps and dances with a ballerina who has also shed hers. That, of course, violates the law and Handicapper General Glampers is forced to kill them both.

This story comes to mind whenever I hear about some local school district that is seriously discussing ending its advanced placement and gifted and talented programs. Of course the reason given for such action is that advanced placement and gifted programs benefit white students to the disadvantage of minority students.

Since the ratio of the differing racial and ethnic groups is not even, the system is not equitable and must be modified or scrapped. Note, however, when you read about these movements, Asian students are usually grouped with white students, but in some instances are separated from them in such a way as to make even the white students look discriminated against.

One such educator, a high school principal who arbitrarily started cutting advanced placement courses in her school, defended her decision by claiming that she acted for reasons of racial equity. She also claimed she wanted to eliminate the stigma from non-honors courses, and to eliminate racial disparity in honors programs.

All this is being done in the name of equity. The titans of education have found it easier to dumb-down or eliminate the special programs to make sure that everyone’s educational experience is equal to everyone else’s, regardless of intellect, skill, or ability.

That’s exactly what Diana Moon Glampers would do: Exchange academic excellence for the nebulous concept of equity.

In Seattle, a former school superintendent is urging the abolition of the school’s gifted program since an analysis of the program found that only .9 percent of black children had been identified as gifted while 12.6 percent of the white children have been so identified. As a result the school district has done away with eligibility testing for its gifted program and will use such touchstones as grades, testimonials from teachers as well as community and family members to decide who gains admission to the gifted program. Regardless, the local NAACP chapter is pressing for the abolition of the program as “racist.”

Nationwide, according to a recent Associated Press study, there were approximately 8.1 percent of white children who were reported as gifted while only 4.5 percent of black students were so classified. According to some experts, this represents a racial disparity that disfavors racial minorities. One professor has suggested that the estimate of gifted minority students is actually half of what it really is.

In Boston, the school authorities, after suspending their exclusive “exam” schools for a year, voted to expand eligibility by guaranteeing places for high-achieving students from poor and disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Obviously there is some truth to the arguments that minority students are getting the short shrift in these situations. That is not new; minority students have been getting the short end of the stick in many areas because they are black, Latino, or from an indigenous group. But the solution, as offered by too many “professional educators,” is to scrap or dilute the existing programs.

That’s called dumbing-down, the same policy that bedeviled Harrison Bergeron. Instead of rewarding excellence no one was allowed to excel.

Unfortunately, in most of these school cases, only a few are truly looking out for all the children. Far too often officials are content to “burn the house down,” as it were, rather than do the heavy lifting of correcting the problems critics claim burden minority students.

The problem right now is that far too many of those tasked with providing education, are unwilling to take on the heavy lifting that would be necessary to correct this disparity.

Too many of these folks are tied to other issues, political and otherwise. Officials, unions, and others are happy to call this racism, yet will do nothing to solve the problem. Charter schools? No. Private tuition grants? No. School choice? No.

Unless there is a willing partner within the educational environment little will be done except to point fingers. Harrison Bergeron rebelled, but it cost him his life. Perhaps parents, working together, can succeed.

Let’s hope.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.) 

This week’s Faith On Trial

 This week we interviewed Matt Lamb of the College Fix on Critical Race Theory and other matters on college campuses today. You can listen to the program by following this link:

https://www.iowacatholicradio.com/faith/episode/32a36cab/faith-on-trial-univ-of-ia-training-crt-teaching-against-the-state-law-matt-lamb-5192022

It’s Federalism, Stupid

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – Years ago, in what seems like another life, I taught college law and political science. Each semester, when I started a new U.S. government class, on the first day, I gave the students a short, ungraded test to see how much they already knew about the government and how it worked.

In general the results bothered me, for while all the students had completed high school and should have had a working understanding of how the government worked, very few were able to answer the simplest of questions correctly. I did not think it unusual that some might not know the name of the person representing them in Congress. I was, however, appalled by so many that didn’t know each state had two senators.

Now I understand that political science is not for everybody, and that the basics of much of how our government works is rooted in historical conditions as much as it is in philosophical norms. For example, the Electoral College makes no sense without understanding the particular situation in which the drafters of the Constitution found themselves.

The same thing applies when we consider the topic of federalism. Defined by a textbook, federalism “is the division of power between a central government and regional units.” In short, federalism in the U.S means a separation of national from state governmental authority. Much of what concerns those interested is how the balance of power between these governments operates.

The basic division is made in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, in what is referred to as the “enumerated powers” of the federal government. It contains a list of powers reserved to the federal government, the most notorious of these are the power “to regulate commerce…among the several states,” known as the “interstate commerce clause,” and the power to make such laws that “shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers,” known as the “necessary and proper clause,” or, as it is sometimes referred to as the elastic clause.

And believe it or not, the federal government was established as a government of limited powers. To an uninitiated observer this might seem strange, considering the current size and scope of today’s government. Yet Article I, Section 8 was an attempt to do just that.

Over the years, however, the federal powers have expanded beyond what our Founding Fathers might have thought, using primarily the interstate commerce and necessary and proper clauses. The federal government has claimed powers, for example, over nearly every aspect of interstate travel, including such matters as local hotel and motel accommodations. Likewise the necessary and proper clause has been used to expand federal authority that has some nexus to any of the enumerated powers.

This, of course, creates a tension between those who believe in more state autonomy and those wanting more power in the hands of a national government. Now, while recent history has seen the courts side more and more with the federal government on these issues, there is a growing list of politicians and academics who favor more power being left in the hands of the states, which have retained their general police powers.

Those who object to the current move to put more power into, or as they might say, back into the hands of the states, point to another article in the Constitution, the long-forgotten Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Now, how does this affect Roe v. Wade? Well, first, the claim that it is settled law is, in the parlance of today, disinformation. The proponents of that argument want you to think of cases such as the 1803 landmark case, Marbury v. Madison, which for the first time articulated the right of the federal courts to overturn federal laws that violate the Constitution.

But there are other cases that provided “settled law” as did the 1857 case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, which held that the Constitution did not confer citizenship on persons of African descent. That case was overturned by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. And let’s not forget the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, which held racial segregation was constitutional in a case involving railroad accommodations, as long as the accommodations were “separate but equal.” That decision was overturned in 1954 by Brown v. Board of Education.

So what does the leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Clinic mean in reality? Well, first we do not know the extent of the final court opinion, but we do have some important clues that indicate Roe will either be overturned or it will be so gutted as to render it toothless.

But more than that, if Roe is overturned the court will be saying that all this federalism stuff matters and only the states are allowed to legislate abortion regulations under their inherent police powers.

What should also be noted is that numerous constitutional scholars, many of them very liberal, including the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have raised serious legal questions about the constitutional underpinning of Roe. Now it should be noted that Congress could try to declare abortion a national right, but unless it does, the states should be completely in charge. Of course granting that right would probably provide more headaches in Washington to define exactly what that “right” would entail.

Overturning Roe will be a game changer, both legally and politically. The arguments about life, when it starts, and how it is protected — or not — will all return to the states. You can expect a lot of emotional debates in state legislative bodies, along with hangers and fetuses in jars. But the issue will not go away. At best it will only be one huge step in the right direction.

On a side note, students often asked me how the federal government gained so much power in relation to the states. There are many reasons for that, some involving historical circumstances, such as the Great Depression which had the nation clamoring for more federal aid while the state budgets were swamped by the economic realities of the times.

My thought, for what it’s worth, is the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913. That amendment provided for the direct popular election of United States senators. Until that time they were chosen to represent their states by the state legislature. Thus, to a large extent, the states lost much of their ability to control their senator to the whims of the people. Just a theory.

Now as you watch the continuing rhubarb over abortion, and wonder why it is happening this way, remember, it’s federalism, and it matters.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio

Biden's Pro-Abortion Catholic Cabinet

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

We can tell a lot about a president just by knowing something about his Cabinet picks. This takes on special significance for Catholics when we have a Catholic president.

 

To begin with, we would expect a Catholic president to be faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church, especially on life and death matters. We would also expect that any Catholics who are chosen to be in his Cabinet would also be loyal sons and daughters of the Church.

 

Biden fails these tests. He is the most ardent defender of abortion rights ever to become president of the United States. That obviously means that his policies are in direct contradiction to the teachings of the Catholic Church. For the most part, his Catholic Cabinet picks also reflect badly on him. He has eight Catholics in his Cabinet.

 

Lloyd Austin is Secretary of Defense. He has no public record on the subject of abortion. Denis McDonough is Secretary of Veterans Affairs. He has an uneven record on abortion, and while he is not a rabid defender of it, he has tilted toward the pro-abortion stance. The other six are all off-the-charts supporters of abortion rights.

 

The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra, is one of the most extreme defenders of abortion-on-demand. He is loved by NARAL, the abortion giant, and has previously earned a zero rating from National Right to Life. He has no qualms about supporting partial-birth abortion, and his passion for abortion is so strong that it inspired him to attempt to close down crisis pregnancy centers in California when he was the state's Attorney General. He is most known for seeking to punish the Little Sisters of the Poor by relentlessly seeking to force them to pay for abortion-inducing services in their healthcare plans.

 

Jennifer Granholm is Secretary of Energy. When she was Governor of Michigan, she twice vetoed a partial-birth abortion ban and worked with other pro-abortion politicians to loosen abortion restrictions.

 

Biden chose Samantha Power to head the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). When she was nominated, CHANGE, an international abortion lobby group, congratulated her for her pro-abortion work. Power has not been shy about her dedication to abortion rights.

 

Gina Raimondo is Secretary of Commerce. When she was Governor of Rhode Island, she championed a law that would allow partial-birth abortions. She also signed a bill that codified abortion protections.

 

Tom Vilsack is Secretary of Agriculture. When he was Governor of Iowa, he vetoed legislation that would have required abortion facilities to provide women with factual information about abortion risks and alternatives to aborting their child. He opposed consent laws that offered women contemplating an abortion with pictures of fetal development.

 

The Secretary of Labor is Marty Walsh. When he was Mayor of Boston, he supported abortion-on-demand and taxpayer-funded abortions. NARAL commended him when he sought to crush crisis pregnancy centers.

 

These are the Catholics who serve in Biden's Cabinet. Most of them work to reinforce each other's animus against the Church's pro-life heritage. Indeed, given the responsibilities that some of them have, they are currently working to ensure that their deadly ideas are infused in their policy decisions.

 

It looks like Biden decided to double down in his support for abortion by choosing Catholics who would support him in this endeavor. He may fool some by walking around with a rosary in his pocket, but more savvy Americans—not just Catholics—are able to distinguish between posturing and fidelity to one's religious tenets. That's a test he cannot pass.

 

Today is White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki's last day on the job—she is going to work for MSNBC, which should be a smooth transition.

The Department of Truth and other matters at DHS

This week Faith On Trial hosted Lora Ries, Director of Security and Immigration Center at the Heritage Foundation joined us to discuss the new “Department of Truth” and other problems with the Department of Homeland Security. You can listen to the program by clicking the link below:

https://www.iowacatholicradio.com/faith/episode/238bcf9d/homeland-securitys-new-ministry-of-truth-51222

Faith On Trial airs every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Iowa Catholic Radio, 1150 AM and 94.5 FM Des Moines; 88.5 FM Adel, and 90.9 FM Creston, or catch it streaming on IowaCatholicRadio.com where you can find podcasts of our older programs that you may have missed.

The disinformation board: This week on Faith On Trial

This week Deacon Mike and Sherill Whisenand – sitting in for Gina – will discuss the Department of Homeland Security’s newly created Disinformation Board with Lore Ries, Director of Boarder Security at the Heritage Foundation. What is this new board? What will be its duties? How will it operate? And what will be its effect on the press and other agencies of the government? So join Deacon Mike and Sherill as they discuss these questions with Lora Ries Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Iowa Catholic Radio, 1150 AM and 94.5 FM Des Moines; 88.5 FM Adel, and 90.9 FM Creston, or catch it streaming on IowaCatholicRadio.com where you can find podcasts of our older programs that you may have missed.

Grooming your kids

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – There was a story in the Epoch Times the other week that to me encapsulates what is truly a war on our children. Over the years I have written and broadcast stories about how the progressive left, their allies in the media, politics, and academia groom your children to accept transgenderism as normal, but this story takes the cake. It deals with the transgendering of kids and doing so behind the backs of their parents. And this isn’t just about what some “wayward” faculty does out of sight. It is now being embraced by the Biden administration, the party it represents, as well as the entire left-wing of the body politic.

The story in question told about a school with a “transition closet” where an arriving student can change from the clothing of their biological sex into that of the opposite sex, change pronouns and names, behind the backs of their parents, and at the end of the day they can change back before going home. And like many other such schools, no one is allowed to talk to those actually responsible for the children, their parents and guardians.

The belief being the children are capable of understanding, if properly instructed, that the concept of biological sex is fluid and that it can be changed to the opposite sex or, for that matter, to any combination the child identifies as including no sex at all. And all with the help of a cabal of far left activists, teachers’ unions, and the dregs of our political class who now control the levers of power.

The school in question was Freemont High School of Oakland, Calif. Amare Roush, founder of the transition closet, says that they keep the existence of the closets “secret from parents” since they fear students will suffer abuse from their parents.

“The goal of the transition closet is for our students to wear the clothes that their parents approve of, come to school and then swap out into the clothes that fit who they truly are,” said Thomas Martin-Edwards, Spanish teacher at the Oakland Unified School District. He sponsors the transition closet and is himself transgender and has posted videos of himself in the classroom showing off the stilettos he wears.

This, of course, is out of sight of the parents, but under the nose of the school administrators. And this is not the only school that is engaging in similar nonsense with your children. Lawsuits across the country allege similar practices in local schools, including exposing children as young as four to pornographic pictures and videos all in an effort to “groom” impressionable youngsters into the trans community.

Jay Richards, Ph.D., director of the DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at the Heritage Foundation, told my radio audience that this transgender movement is having an effect on children nationwide.

“The ideology is that our biological sex, that is our creation as male and female, that it’s not really a fundamental reality. What the fundamental reality is the subjective perceived gender identity that we all supposedly have and it is entirely independent of our bodies. That’s the philosophy behind all these weird movements that are now cropping up in places like Florida and at the school board level and that we are seeing in the national news,” he said.

It starts with what is called “gender-affirming care” in which the student’s gender identity is affirmed and ultimately ends with gender-affirming surgeries.

And, he noted, that this is not isolated to just a few renegade school boards, but is now the official policy of the United States as proclaimed by the Biden administration which has made gender-affirming care the polestar for all medical and psychological treatment of gender dysphoria cases involving children.

That gender-affirming care, which is now mandated by the government, begins with social affirmation, which starts with adopting gender-affirming hairstyles, clothing, name, pronouns, restrooms, and other facilities. This is followed by puberty blockers which stop pubertal development, and hormone therapy. Gender-affirming surgeries follow which permanently change the individual.

The Biden Justice Department has recently sent a letter to all state attorneys general warning them that if anyone, including the state or parents, interferes with a minor receiving gender-affirming care, they could be violating civil rights and other laws protecting the child. This means that a child who is still a minor, can request such treatment through a social worker, teacher, or some other adult, without the knowledge or approval of the parent. The choice, according to those who control the government, belongs to a child, even though the law considers the child incapable of any other legal choice.

Dr. Richards describes this “grooming” as almost comical. “If they are not put on this pathway, most kids who suffer gender dysphoria will grow out of it. Some 61 percent to 98 percent of these kids will naturally reconcile with their biological sex after going through puberty. In many cases puberty itself may be the cure for gender dysphoria.
“But that healing can be thwarted if a child is socially transitioned at home and school, and put on puberty blockers and then cross-sex drugs. The further kids go down this pathway, the less likely they are to turn back. And the greater is the cost for those who de-transition,” he said in an article published before his appearance.

He noted that the effect of keeping parents in the dark is to ultimately destroy the family unit. This is a “wrecking ball designed to destroy the institution of the family, which is the foundational cell of society in hope that some brand new utopia will come into play,” he told our radio listeners.

He also noted that the most susceptible children for this grooming tend to be those with other problems, such as being on the autism spectrum, having social anxiety, or even severe depression, that make for affirmative identity coaxing by trusted adults in a school setting more appealing where this activity has been normalized.

This, of course, should horrify parents or anyone who knows and loves a child, or, for that matter, anyone with a sense of right and wrong. So as I did last week with the column on post-birth abortion, we really need to take a hard look at the problem and see who is providing the impetus for this immorality.

First we must understand that this is totally immoral: It is an attack on young, innocent children for someone’s political or social gratification. The negative impact this will have on children cannot be overstated. Yet our leading politicians of the left, as well as the teachers’ unions, are all on board with this policy. We know who these people are, and, as I said last week, those who vote to continue them in office, where they can inflict this on our children, are morally complicit with this wickedness and will answer to a higher authority for their complicity in this evil.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)

Pro-Abortion Fascists Target Catholic Churches

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

The cops will hopefully be out in force this Sunday to monitor planned attacks inside Catholic churches. A left-wing fascist group, Ruth Sent Us, is asking its followers to crash Catholic churches on Mother’s Day.

Vandals have already struck in Boulder, Colorado, desecrating a church, and pro-abortion lunatics have rioted in Los Angeles.

Ruth Sent Us is named after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. While she was an abortion-rights advocate, she also made it clear that the decision to legalize abortion should not have been made by the Supreme Court—it was up to lawmakers to render such a ruling. Moreover, she was never one to promote violence, never mind counsel a Nazi-like attack disrupting Mass.

Thus, Ruth Sent Us is wildly out of step with the thinking of the person they claim to be honoring. In fact, they are dishonoring her legacy.

We will press the authorities to prosecute any attack on a Catholic Church as a hate crime. These thugs need to be stopped in their tracks.

If President Biden does not address this issue, he is aiding and abetting anti-Catholicism.

Abortion Activists to Storm Catholic Churches During Mass on Mothers Day

CV NEWS FEED // A radical abortion group calling itself “Ruth Sent Us” announced this week that it is mobilizing activists to enter Catholic churches during Mass this coming Sunday in response to reports that the Supreme Court is set to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

“Whether you’re a ‘Catholic for Choice’, ex-Catholic, of other or no faith, recognize that six extremist Catholics set out to overturn Roe,” the group stated on Twitter. “Stand at or in a local Catholic Church Sun May 8.”

Ruth Sent Us included a video with the post, which showed activists dressed in Handmaid’s Tale costumes in a sacred building, disrupting worshippers with shouts of “Abortion on demand and without apology!” 

The same radical group earlier this week published the locations of pro-life Supreme Court justices’ private homes, calling on activists to show up at their houses. “We must rise up to force accountability using a diversity of tactics,” the group stated.

A Ruth Sent Us TikTok account uploaded a video of activists marching toward the doors of a Catholic Church. “Sometime a*****es need a beating,” the post stated.

Ruth Sent Us tweeted out another video of protesters interrupting Mass in another sacred building. The activists marched in and stood between the holy altar and the parishioners. “For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has been an institution for the enslavement of women,” shouted one.

“This is what Mother’s Day should look like,” tweeted Ruth Sent Us. “Catholic and Evangelical Churches nationwide.”

CatholicVote Communications Director Joshua Mercer says Catholics throughout the country should be wary and prepared when they attend Mass, especially this coming Sunday.

“In the past, we might have blown off the words of these activists as empty threats. But given the recent rash of very real attacks on Catholic statues and churches, it makes sense to be cautious,” Mercer said.

He added that Ruth Sent Us and other activists are quite explicit about their anti-Catholicism. “If they wanted, they could have just focused on the issue of abortion. But instead they chose to highlight the Catholic faith of some of the pro-life justices,” he said, noting that the radical abortion group called the justices “extremist Catholics.”

CatholicVote has called on Catholics to pray for the justices whose addresses were published. “We’re talking about human beings, with children,” Mercer said. “And this Sunday, keep your eyes open. These are ruthless people, and they’re looking for a confrontation.”

Below readers can view the radical activist group interrupting Mass.

https://twitter.com/RuthSentUs/status/1521502035887144962?s=20&t=X4mTg2HJtM-R3f0omtaKPg

https://twitter.com/RuthSentUs/status/1521566593850826752?s=20&t=XBPtKqBSGS4grbHwNbRXig

Biden Says Kids Belong to Their Teachers - The Stream

Biden Says Kids Belong to Their Teachers - The Stream: Schools are becoming indoctrination factories, trying to turn children against their country and their own parents' values. It's what the teachers unions intend.

Biden Says Right to Abortion Comes From Being a ‘Child of God’ - The Stream

Biden Says Right to Abortion Comes From Being a ‘Child of God’ - The Stream: President Joe Biden said that the right to an abortion comes from being a “child of God” during press remarks Wednesday.

This week’s Faith On Trial program

Here is a link to this week’s program with Chuck Hurley, vice president and chief legal counsel for The Family Leader:

https://www.iowacatholicradio.com/faith/episode/329a8757/dobbs-case-and-leak-of-draft-5522

Faith On Trial is heard every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Iowa Catholic Radio, 1150 AM and 94.5 FM Des Moines; 88.5 FM Adel, and 90.9 FM Creston, or catch it streaming on IowaCatholicRadio.com where you can find podcasts of our older programs that you may have missed.