Friday, November 20, 2009

Kathleen Sebelius to Defend Both Abortion AND Adoption

Another walking contradiction. Sebelius, a Roman Catholic vetoed pro-life abortion legislation in Kansas in 2003, 2005, 2006, and again in 2008 including a measure that would have required informing women who are considering an abortion about both the development of their unborn child and the alternatives to abortion. Yet, today we learn that she is championing adoption policies by celebrating the 10th anniversary of National Adoption Day. Well, which is it? Veto bills that inform women of abortion alternatives yet later on celebrate adoption when it's politically expedient? Will you support life or veto legislation that attempts to protect life? Apparently she wants it both ways. Sounding similar to Pontius Pilate style governing, Roman Catholic Sebelius both defends death and life by defending abortion and adoption. And here I thought that 'human enlightenment' had propelled the 'humanistic condition' to mature beyond 1st century rulers the likes of Pontius Pilate.

Why couldn't she just champion pro-life policies instead of vetoing every pro-life bill that came across her table? After all she was first a citizen of Catholicism before she became a citizen of Kansas. Her Archbishop said he hoped his meetings with her would make her understand the need “to take the difficult political step, but necessary moral step, of repudiating her past actions in support of legalized abortion” and also the need to extend “the maximum legal protection to the unborn children of Kansas.” In her last veto, the governor of Kansas ended it by scowling at pro-lifers in her veto message saying, “For years, the people of Kansas have asked their elected officials to move beyond legislative debates on issues like abortion.” Have the people of Kansas really asked that Sebelius? or do you just assume it since you won an election?

Apparently, Sebelius also has selective hearing. For years her Archbishop has likewise asked her to move beyond legislative debates on issues like abortion and finally become faithful to her true citizenship in heaven by enacting moral policies that defend the unborn. When Sebelius received the Sacrament of Confirmation she was elected first by God as a representative of His divine laws. Sacramental Confirmation is an indelible mark on the soul that swears an oath to God to uphold his principles, teachings, and the faith in all its forms. Sebelius, you were elected by God before the citizens of Kansas even heard of you. When you were baptized you were elected a citizen of Heaven - a country that existed long before Kansas was established. When will Roman Catholic Sebelius move beyond political self aggrandizement and live up to the sacramental vows made in Confirmation of defending the teachings of the Church? Whom do you serve, God or man?

But like Pilate, Sebelius admits to listening to the mob first before God. Like Pilate, she knows which strings will strike a chord with promoting her popularity in the political arena. She knows what to feed the angry mob to save herself. But we can be fair, Pilate probably acted out of fear of the angry pack before him, so we can assume that perhaps Sebelius is acting out of fear of the prowling pack looking to devour yet another faithful pro-life Catholic politician and continue embarrassing Roman Catholicism. She knows that the media will lap up her celebration of adoption along with any celebration of Roe v. Wade. Then she can breathe a sigh of relief, for she has deluded herself that is better to fear the world rather than God. She knows how to work the bloodthirsty pack and as long as she gives the world greater credence than she owes to God, then she's got it made in the liberal media today.

Sebelius further claims that she is 'personally opposed' but dares not force her morals on somebody else. Oh really? So if I'm a lawmaker back when the decision came to make rape illegal, which I am personally opposed to, should I have vetoed such a proposal because "I dare not impose my morals on another"? Of course not, that is, not unless I was a careerist politician and thought that I answered not to God, but to mob. Not unless I made a careful calculation of how it would look to the mob for my political advancement.

Sebelius didn't fool her Archbishop who stated “The governor has spoken to me on more than one occasion about her obligation to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions. I have asked her to show a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law". Rape was only repulsive to man's law only after and only because it was first repulsive to God's law. Slavery was legal for centuries even though divine law repudiated it. People considered slavery established precedent while they unjustly enslaved their fellowman until they were emancipated. Had slave owners and those who supported slavery listened to divine law, slavery could have ended much sooner. God's laws made it to the books only after man finally figured it out and accepted the truth in them. The same is true with abortion.

Meanwhile, for politicians to remain consistent, they cannot celebrate life on November 21, only to celebrate death on January 23.

For more on Archbishop Naumann of Kansas and the exchanges with Sebelius click here.

Archbishop Naumann:

"The Catholic Church views abortion as first and foremost a moral issue - not a religious or faith issue - because the sacredness of human life pertains to the natural law, which reveals the intrinsic rightness or wrongness of human acts through reason."

No comments: