It's a defining moment in a parent's life: Seeing their unborn child's image on an ultrasound for the first time. Now pregnant women could have the chance to hold a life-size model of their unborn baby.
The startling new medical technology is the result of a Royal College of Art design student's PhD.
Support the Holy Father and pray with him!
-Pope Benedict XVI
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Stunning new technology allows parents to hold a life-size model of their unborn child
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Buddhism and Abortion
Mention the word Buddhist and what most people draw up is an image of the stereotypic liberal: hippie, junkie, vegan, possibly homosexual, and now, even pro-abortion. Drugs and vegetarianism aside, let me clear any confusion there is about abortion.
This is from a Buddhist’s point of view.
Alright, first off, let us examine as to why certain people hold such a view. It’s not that it’s entirely wrong to say that some ‘modern’ Buddhists today actually uphold this image, but it is wrong to say that all Buddhists in general conform to this image. In fact, only a handful so called Buddhists do, and, according to Buddhist terms, this handful does not qualify as Buddhists.
One must understand that Buddhism is a very free religion, with no commandments or god to obey. It is not at all as strict as Christianity, Islam, or even Judaism. Unfortunately, it is this freedom that is abused by the naive and dim-witted.
Many people who want to follow in their frivolous lifestyles assume that they will be free from judgment by a god or any other all-powerful deity if they embrace Buddhism. Buddhism is their ‘way out’ of a ‘system’ that bars them from their activities. They use – or should I say misuse – this freedom and take it as a shield while they engage in their frivolous and irresponsible activities. They use Buddhism as an excuse.
So what is the Buddhist view on this subject of abortion? Before we get into the details, let us first come up with a definition for the term.
“An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo, resulting in or caused by its death. An abortion can occur spontaneously due to complications during pregnancy or can be induced, in humans and other species. In the context of human pregnancies, an abortion induced to preserve the health of the pregnant female is termed a therapeutic abortion, while an abortion induced for any other reason is termed an elective abortion. The term abortion most commonly refers to the induced abortion of a human pregnancy, while spontaneous abortions are usually termed miscarriages.”
Okay, so abortion = termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of the fetus.
Now let’s look at why abortions are carried out.
1. Medical complications – Either both mother and child, or mother alone, may have fatal or serious complications if the pregnancy is allowed to be carried to term.
2. Rape victims – Rape victims who have become pregnant do not wish to carry the child of their rapist. This decision is usually carried out as a result of emotional trauma, including hatred, and shame. Sometimes it is the family of the victim that persuades her to go through with an abortion, for the sake of saving the family reputation. The victim is left with the decision to bring the baby to the world and lose support from her family, give the baby up for adoption, or to abort the pregnancy. Usually, the family does not opt for adoption because society will get to know about the mother’s pregnancy. After all, it is pretty hard to hide a progressively developing belly (unless you tell people you’ve got a massive tumor growing in there...). Therefore abortion is usually the most common choice.
3. ‘Accidents’ happen. A wild night out, or a one night stand (without the pills, or condoms) sometimes ends up with the female party getting knocked up. Neither parents are ready to take up responsibility for their actions and therefore decide to just easily abort the pregnancy.
Why is abortion viewed merely as something scientific, or medical, rather than something closely related to ethics? Or morals? When you break something down so much into establishing it as a scientific procedure that is exactly what it becomes: just another scientific procedure. And when we think scientific, we don’t exactly think religion, or morals, do we? No, because we are taught – especially at the beginning of a semester of genetics – that science and religion don’t mix. So abortion suddenly becomes just another surgery. A quick fix to a ‘problem’.
Can there really be a scientific religion in actual existence? Science and religion are supposed to be two different things. Science attempts to explain and find answers to questions that deal with the natural world, the mundane everyday world and universe that is perceived by the senses. Religion, on the other hand, tries to explain things that cannot be otherwise explained in the mundane world. Religion deals with the supernatural and the spiritual.
However, it is interesting to note that Buddhism is neither a science nor a religion. It is not a science because it does not deal only with the world perceived by our senses, and it is not a religion because it does not require ‘belief’ in anything. That is why, if you ask a Buddhist, they’d say ‘I know’ instead of ’I believe’. Neither is it a philosophy, as most commonly refer to it.[1]
However, what Buddhism really is has been greatly misunderstood by those new to the subject. Most blatantly assume that, because Buddhism agrees with a lot of things in modern science, everything scientific is accepted in Buddhism. This is not true. Science is science, and its existence does not rely on morals. Buddhism, on the other hand, is not at all devoid of morals. After all, the very first precept in the Buddhist disciplinary code is “I shall abstain from taking life.”
This is part of the karaniya metta sutta (discourse on loving kindness):Let one contemplate and wish:May all beings be well and safe.May all beings be happy.Whatever living beings there may be—whether they are weak or strong, omitting none,the great or the mighty, medium size, short, small, or large,those seen and those unseen, those dwelling near and far away,those born as well as those yet to be born—may all beings be happy at heart.From a Buddhist’s point of view, I don’t think we can accept only the scientific definition of what a life is, or more precisely, when a fertilized egg can be considered a human life. We cannot judge whether something is a life or not just because it doesn’t look human or animal.
Most people who’re anti-abortion go to great lengths to carry their cause either by trying to prove that a fetus’ heart starts to beat after so long, or by holding nauseating posters of aborted fetuses. I think this is a simple point and doesn’t need to be carried so far. Simply: if a woman is pregnant, that means she is carrying life, be it one cell or a mass of cells without any discernible features.
Re-read the passage from the karaniya metta sutta. Pay special attention to the line before the last: “those born as well as those yet to be born”. It is obvious that, according to Buddhism, one must respect all life, even those that are yet to be born. If you call yourself a Buddhist and yet say that you are in favor of abortion, then you’re throwing away the meaning of the very first precept of abstaining from taking life. You cannot contemplate and wish for the well-being, safety, and happiness of all beings if you are in favor of taking away an unborn life.
Fortunately, I have no illegitimate children born out of wed lock or as a result of rape. Heaven forbid that ever happens, and I do not wish it to happen to anybody else either! I am not denying that rape is a heinous crime and that it is an extremely painful ordeal that even a lifetime may not be able to erase. But there cannot be any justification in taking away the life of the unborn child that has come into existence as a result of it. After all, what has the child done to deserve such a fate? It may not be an easy thing to do, but to let go of the attachment to the memory of it is possibly the best way to heal: letting go and moving on just like everything else that arises, comes to be, and passes away.[2]
Also, society should be more understanding of victims of rape and should stop stigmatizing them. There are some idiots who blame the victim for what happened! Yeah, I have no clue where they get their logic from...
The worst kind, however, are the people who casually have sex – irresponsibly – whenever they want to and then just very easily throw away the life of an unborn child just because they are not ready to take up responsibility.
What about the case where an abortion needs to be carried out for medical reasons (therapeutic abortion)? What’s the Buddhist view on that? Is it okay to perform a therapeutic abortion? Once again, life is more important than anything else. If you can save at least one life, then it is better than letting two die. Therefore yes, it is okay.
The bottom line is that elective abortion does not sit anywhere on the list of ‘Okays’ in Buddhism, so please do not assume that Buddhism sits in favor of abortion. Buddhism is not a ‘get-away’ ticket or a ‘quick fix’. It is an education and a way of life.
-------------------------------------
[1]To find out why Buddhism is neither a philosophy nor a doctrine, read the excerpt from a conversation between Dighanaka the ascetic and the Gautama Buddha which I’ve included at the bottom of this post. Link: http://thebuddhistblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/buddhism-is-not-philosophy-or-doctrine.html
[2] The concept of ‘letting go’ comes from the Buddhist teaching that all things are Anicca (impermanent), Dukkha (unsatisfactory), and Anatma (lacking self). Link: http://www.beyondthenet.net/dhamma/trilogy.htm
-------------------------------------
Buddhism: Neither a Philosophy nor a Doctrine
Dighanakha asked the Buddha, "Gautama, what is your teaching? What are your doctrines? For my part, I dislike all doctrines and theories. I don't subscribe to any at all."
The Buddha smiled and asked, "Do you subscribe to your doctrine of not following any doctrines? Do you believe in your doctrine of not-believing?"
Somewhat taken aback, Dighanakha replied, "Gautama whether I believe or don't believe is no importance."
The Buddha spoke gently, "Once a person is caught by belief in a doctrine, he loses all his freedom. When one becomes dogmatic, he believes his doctrine is the only truth and that all other doctrines are heresy. Disputes and conflicts all arise from narrow views. They can extend endlessly, wasting precious time and sometimes even leading to war. Attachment to views is the greatest impediment to the spiritual path. Bound to narrow views, one becomes so entangled that it is no longer possible to let the door of truth open."
[...]
Dighanakha asked, "But what of your own teaching? If someone follows your teaching will he become caught in narrow views?"
"My teaching is not a doctrine nor a philosophy. It is not the result of discursive thought or mental conjecture like various philosophies which contend that the fundamental essence of the universe is fire, water, earth, wind, or spirit, or that the universe is either finite or infinite, temporal, or eternal. Mental conjecture and discursive thought about truth are like ants crawling around the rim of the bowl -- they never get anywhere. The things I say come from my own experience. You can confirm them all by your own experience.
[...]
My goal is not to explain the universe, but to help guide others to have a direct experience of reality. Words cannot describe reality. Only direct experience enables us to see the true face of reality."Dighanakha exclaimed, "Wonderful, wonderful Gautama! But what would happen if a person did perceive your teaching as a dogma?"
[...]
I must state clearly that my teaching is method to experience reality and not reality itself, just as a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon itself. An intelligent person makes use of the finger to see the moon."
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Choose Life (Sketch compilation)
Thursday, November 27, 2008
On Choice
Volition (n)- The act of making a choice. Sometimes the choice of inaction has consequences stronger than we could ever imagine. Throughout history, men have been faced with difficult choices in a world that makes it easy for them to conform. This film explores the hope that lies behind every decision made in the face of adversity; the hope that is buried in the heart of those that look beyond themselves and see something bigger worth fighting for.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Lessons in Progressive Politics by Michael Cook
Something unexpected happened when Uruguayan politicians tried to liberalise their country's archaic abortion laws.
It's a familiar scenario: a tall, photogenic, charismatic left-leaning President who outsmarted traditional political forces to win office with 51.7 percent of the national vote. His platform is social justice, tax reform, human rights, better health coverage, and banning smoking in public. His party controls both houses of the legislature. Elected in the midst of an economic crisis, the pundits described his campaign of hope as "the most profound political rupture in recent history".
And despite diplomatic rows, environmental controversies and a bitter dispute over free trade, perhaps the most controversial decision of his term is a Congressional proposal to dramatically liberalise abortion.
So what did President Tabaré Vázquez, do about a bill to give Uruguay the most progressive abortion law in Latin America?He vetoed it.
Here's an excerpt from his speech on why he vetoed the bill:
The true degree of civilisation of a nation is measured by how the neediest are protected. Therefore we must protect the weakest amongst us. Because the criterion is not the value of the subject with respect to how others respond to him, or his usefulness, but the value which exists due to his mere existence...
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Euthanasia and Murder by G.K. Chesterton
Euthanasia and Murder
There is no law against a man biting off his own nose, unless it be a law of nature; nor even any police regulation against his hanging himself up by the hair or whiskers to talk to his friends and family in greater discomfort. There are penalties for suicide but, though I have no suicidal habits myself, I fancy they must be rather hard to apply; since they could only be sharpened into the legal and logical paradox of hanging a man to cure him of wanting to be hanged.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Let the work begin
The movement to end legal abortion and recognize the right to life, at every age and stage, will not go away. In fact, I predict that the election of this new President with such an extreme approach to this fundamental human rights issue assures a new birth of a new movement unlike this Nation has ever seen.
So to my fellow Pro-life Americans who are tired, disappointed, distraught and dismayed, I say never lose hope. Our position concerning the humanity of children in the womb is revealed in the Natural Law and confirmed by medical science. It is true. It will be recognized and prevail as certainly as the truth concerning the intrinsic evil of slavery came to be recognized and prevailed in this Nation...
As for this evening, President Elect Barack Obama Makes History. Tomorrow let the work to build a true Culture of Life begin again.
- By Deacon Keith A. Fournier
Thanks Justin for the tip.
My thoughts at the end of a long campaign
As a political scientist, as a university student, as a Catholic, and I believe, just as a rational human being, I detest the deceit that Barack Obama represents.
I believe that the leader of any civilized nation, and especially one who claims to be the leader of the free world, must be committed to defending every human being, whether they are able to articulate their views or not; whether they have the ability to make their fellow human beings aware of the injustices done against them or not.
In the 1860s, despite the very real danger of tearing a great country apart and destroying it, President Lincoln, a Republican, decided to stand up for what was good and right - and stood for the emancipation of the African American slaves of the US.
A century after that, in the 1960s, racism was rampant; African Americans were treated as second class citizens. But courageous Democrats, led by Presidents JFK and LBJ, despite opposition from bigoted lawmakers and leaders, despite the danger of losing the support of their traditional bases, stood up for what was right - and championed racial equality. America today is reaping the benefits of these.
Today, a horror worse than slavery and racism is taking place in the US. 1.6 million unborn babies are killed in their mothers womb every year.
The victims of this holocaust cannot cry out in protest. The media, human rights groups do not see the crime being committed. And so we are silent.
But a grievous injustice is being committed nonetheless. An unborn baby is a human being. Logically it's impossible to deny this.
The leaders of the US have sworn to preserve the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
The Democrats call themselves pro-choice (what a sick euphemism that is)
But to them, the only people who's life matters are those who can vote. The only choice that they consider are those that can boost them to office.
Barack Obama goes further. He's an extremist even among Democrats. He's rabidly pro-abortion, denying medical attention even for infants who, are born alive despite an attempted abortion. The child is to be left to die.
He has vowed that one of his first acts as President would be to sign the (again, euphemistically-named) Freedom of Choice Act which would force states to make abortion available. That is so un-American. The convention is that federal government intervenes as little as possible, and issues are left to the state to decide.
He actually wants no discussion on the issue - he says the culture war is "so 90s". He seems to want to stamp out dissent and debate. And this is the man who is going to lead what is considered the greatest democracy in the world.
Culturally and ideologically, the Democrats' positions on many issues seem so appealing. I would love to support them. I'm against the death penalty. Many of their ideas on poverty are so in line with the Church's teaching on social justice (and in fact, Democrat Senator Chris Dodd mentioned that many of the Democratic principles could be traced to Pope Leo XIII's social encyclicals, especially Rerum Novarum). No wonder they appeal to Catholics: social justice and the common good are very much part of our world-view. This was the party that allowed a Catholic to run for the Presidency. This is the party that has done the historic thing of successfully putting forward an African-American into the White House, less that 50 years after the evil days of segregation.
And yet, they support the murder of defenceless children: infanticide. This wipes out all the potential good that they might espouse. Because it is such a horror, such an injustice.
It's a huge disappointment that Obama has won. It's a blow to the pro-life movement. But we'll keep on championing for the little ones.
Perhaps some greater good will come from this. A LOT is expected from Obama. Perhaps he will fail to deliver his promises so spectacularly that this huge dissatisfaction with the Republicans (for which we can credit George Bush, the neo-cons and the Iraq War) will be a short one. I hope people will realise that empty rhetoric and charisma are no substitutes for love, compassion and decency.
At least these elections have made the bishops of the United States bolder in exercising their teaching authority. Great leaders like Archbishop Chaput have let their voice be heard. More Catholics than before know that abortion is evil and, I hope, this has strengthened the pro-life movement.
I certainly became a more adamant defender of life because I got to read arguments and explanations that proved how illogical and inhumane the pro-abortion camp was.
These elections have given me the chance to explain to a few people why I supported John McCain, a candidate who is considered unpopular my almost everyone I know.
It also forced me not to be afraid of people's opinions. At first I kept my support for McCain rather silent, to avoid confrontation, and because I didn't think I could substantiate my stance. But that didn't seem sensible. I wrote about my support for McCain on my Facebook status, hoping people would question me. And they did. And some were Catholic. I had the wonderful experience of discussing the issue with them. One conversation heightened my respect for a friend immensely because of his willingness to reason and to refine his stances. He claims to not like politics - but his views on politics are so much sharper than many who think they know a lot. Another Catholic went from thinking that abortion is a human right and that it was necessary to prevent over-population and climate change (a stance i was shocked to hear) to an acceptance that Obama's pro-abortion stance was a blotch on his credentials. I thank God for these experiences. It certainly wasn't any eloquence on my part, I was just sharing what I had read from the dear bishops of the US Church.
With Obama in power, we continue to have the opportunity now to say why abortion is such an atrocity, even from a non-religious point of view. And we must!
Remember, the Almighty God has those little ones in His arms. Obama might be able to sanction the destruction of their little bodies, but their souls are with God. And that's eventually a great comfort.
The Church in America might be in for a hard time. Am sure the Democrats are very annoyed with the bishops. But persecution always strengthens the Holy Catholic Church.
Faithful American Catholics and their bishops might be face to face with the gates of hell. But know that the gates of hell shall never prevail against Christ's Church.
America has voted
When I heard the news from Dom today, I was deeply saddened. 48,000,000 babies dead since 1973 and counting. At least 1,000,000 dead per year; 3800 killed per day. And the holocaust will continue. I am not big on superstition, but when the news broke out this afternoon, the sunny sky quickly turned dark and gloomy, the rain pounded heavily on the rooftops, and thunder roared from above. I wonder if this was the lament of these innocent victims.
This morning, something big was happening.
The value of life was weighed and measured, and it was found wanting.
Lord, have mercy on us.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Sometimes life surprises us
I wonder if Barack Obama could look him in the eye and say that him mother had the right to murder before he was born. In Obama's eyes Nick Vujicic would have been a punishment not a blessing to his mother ("I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.")
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Just look
The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.Farther in:Have you any doubt that it is a human being?
If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?
If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?
If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.
It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets.
Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Archbishop Chaput: Little Murders
I believe that Senator Obama, whatever his other talents, is the most committed ''abortion-rights'' presidential candidate of either major party since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973. Despite what Prof. Kmiec suggests, the party platform Senator Obama runs on this year is not only aggressively ''pro-choice;'' it has also removed any suggestion that killing an unborn child might be a regrettable thing. On the question of homicide against the unborn child - and let's remember that the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer explicitly called abortion ''murder'' - the Democratic platform that emerged from Denver in August 2008 is clearly anti-life.
Prof. Kmiec argues that there are defensible motives to support Senator Obama. Speaking for myself, I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates....The truth is that for some Catholics, the abortion issue has never been a comfortable cause. It's embarrassing. It's not the kind of social justice they like to talk about. It interferes with their natural political alliances. And because the homicides involved in abortion are ''little murders'' - the kind of private, legally protected murders that kill conveniently unseen lives - it's easy to look the other way....The abortion conflict has never simply been about repealing Roe v. Wade. And the many pro-lifers I know live a much deeper kind of discipleship than ''single issue'' politics. But they do understand that the cornerstone of Catholic social teaching is protecting human life from conception to natural death. They do understand that every other human right depends on the right to life. They did not and do not and will not give up - and they won't be lied to.
So I think that people who claim that the abortion struggle is ''lost'' as a matter of law, or that supporting an outspoken defender of legal abortion is somehow ''prolife,'' are not just wrong; they're betraying the witness of every person who continues the work of defending the unborn child. And I hope they know how to explain that, because someday they'll be required to.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Francis Cardinal Arinze on pro-choice Catholic politicians
Saturday, October 18, 2008
"Save our Children!"
The Archdiocesan Administrator who is running St. Louis until a replacement can be found for its previous shepherd Abp. Raymond Burke ... has issued an extraordinary exhortation to the Catholics under his care:
"Save our children! More than anything else, this election is about saving our children or killing our children. This life issue is the overriding issue facing each of us in this coming election. All other issues, including the economy, have to take second place to the issue of life."
... Save our children! How can a so-called good Catholic vote for a candidate that supports laws that take the life of innocent children, when there is an alternative? If there were two candidates who supported abortion, but not equally, we would have the obligation to mitigate the evil by voting for the less-permissive candidate.
... Save our children! How can a so-called good Catholic vote for a candidate that supports laws that justify the killing of a child that survived a botched abortion? How can such a so-called good Catholic receive the Holy Eucharist?
... Save our children! I have no doubt that there may be some so-called good Catholics who are reading this column and who may be really angry about now. I ask the question "Why would such a person be angry?" If we do good deeds, then our conscience is at peace. If we do evil deeds, then our conscience bothers us. It is my hope that this column will lead some of our so-called good Catholics to study the Catholic Catechism.
... Save our children! Some of our so-called good Catholics may have hardened their hearts against the real understanding of induced abortions, that they can no longer see that this involves the destruction of our children. "If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts!"
... Save our children! Supporting induced abortions is not the greatest sin in the world. A greater sin is the refusal to repent of such a serious crime or the denial that this involves the killing of innocent children.
... Save our children! I have used this terminology again and again penetrate the defenses of anyone who in the past may have put personal, economic or political interests above the issue of saving our children. The right to life is our most fundamental right, and to defend this right on behalf of the most vulnerable is a great privilege and is worth giving one’s life for. Policemen and firemen always risk their lives to save human life. Why should we not risk our own reputation to save our children?"
Friday, October 17, 2008
Revelation: Obama May Have Been a Fetus
Although Obama has consistently pushed a radical anti-fetus agenda throughout his political career, a revelation that he was actually a fetus at one time could sink his campaign among hard-core Democrats.
"The Democratic leadership does not like fetuses," said one high ranking source in the Democratic Party. "To find out this late in the game that Barack Obama may have been a fetus is very disturbing for a lot of us."
Some DNC officials are saying they feel "lied to."
Obama campaign spokespeople, however, are saying that no photographic evidence exists of Obama as a fetus. DNC spokesperson, Joe the spokesperson, said "the first pictures which exist of Sen. Obama are from when he was a child in Indonesia...I mean Hawaii."
One Obama aide did say that Obama may be willing to admit he was at one time a blob of tissue but nothing more at this time.
It is unclear that if indeed Obama was at one time a fetus, when he might have stopped being a fetus and became a human person worthy of rights but so far the Obama campaign has refused to specify a moment at what moment a fetus becomes a person.
"Well, according to Obama's abortion record I don't think he believes a fetus becomes a human until about kindergarten," said Joe the Pro-life activist. DNC spokespeople said nobody knows when a "fetus" becomes a person so it's safe just to make them all available for abortion just in case.
...
Some political experts said it would be like finding out Newt Gingrich, who has pushed for closing the border, was an illegal immigrant. Or the hypocrisy of Senator Larry Craig trumpeting family values.
John McCain said today it's not the fact that Obama was a fetus at one time but the hypocrisy of his anti-fetal stance that makes it relevant to this election.
I love it! Read the rest here
Joe the spokesman and Joe the pro-life activist are a parody of "Joe the plumber" that first Sen McCain and then Sen Obama referred to during the last debate.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Let the little ones come to me...
And here's a very nice video about The Catholic Vote: