Answering Thom’s Question in Two Words

Thom asked why the Catholic Left is not paying any attention to Lila Rose’s recent exposes of the abortion behemoth Planned Parenthood.  Here’s what I think.  The answer is really rather simple, and can be summarized in two words.  [To continue reading click "continue reading," not "read entire post".]

Birth Control.  It’s not merely that many Catholic Leftists are not-so-cryptic abortion supporters, and that they partisanly oppose any successful effort by pro-lifers to halt abortion because it highlights that all the politicians they support are themselves in bed with Planned Parenthood.  [Per "Catholics For Free Choice" Frances Kissling: "My experience in the progressive movement in the church is that most of the people I work with are personally pro-choice and will simply not admit it publicly."]

It’s deeper than that.  The dissident Catholic Left who pick and choose magisterial authority, derive their identity from one overarching source:  they are sexual revolutionaries.  Their movement was born in their public dissent from Humanae Vitae’s teaching on birth control over 40 years ago, and that dissent is their one core value. 

But abortion and birth control are siamese twins.  Every honest person recognizes this–even the U.S. Supreme Court’s Casey decision in 1992 refusing to overturn Roe.  Since Planned Parenthood is the world’s leading abortionist organization, it is no surprise they are also the world’s leading birth control peddlers. 

As such, the dissident Catholic Left are natural sympathizers and even encouragers of Planned Parenthood.  They don’t want public funding of Planned Parenthood to decrease–quite the contrary.  The openly advocate more funding of “family planning,” which IS Planned Parenthood funding.  They have no problem with the fact that Obamacare will funnel not-directly-abortion cash to Planned Parenthood so they can expand facilities to provide “family planning” and “women’s health,” and with that new overhead they will likewise expand their abortions, in numbers and gestational age, though they ”segregate” the abortions from federal funds using accounting schemes that the Catholic Left gave their imprimatur to in Obamacare.

The dissident Catholic Left have always been the prime movers in clamoring for the Vatican and pro-lifers to accept “salvation by latex,” as shown in the recent condom controversy.  Therefore it’s no surprise that the dissident Catholic Left would not likely be caught opposing Planned Parenthood:  they are natural allies. 

Ironically, these Catholics are really dupes of the birth control movement, which from the first and through the present has always been a white elitist eugenic movement aimed at eliminating the poor and minorities.  The birth control movement’s strategy has been startlingly simple and wildly successful: ensnare affluent Westerners in sexual libertineism enabled by birth control, and then those same people will naturally vote and pay for birth control imperialism against the lower classes in inner cities and third world nations. 

And their biggest tools have been dissident Catholics, whom they have let loose to tear down the Church’s firm stance in favor of created sexuality, which is the only force in the world standing against the birth control movement’s eugenic dominance.

While the Catholic Left likes to posture itself as the champion of the poor, the Latino, the third world and the downtrodden, they have gleefully allowed the Rockefellers and Sangers of the world to wholly co-opt them into propagandizing for the birth control movement, which enables its efforts to experiment on and exterminate those same populations. 

This is the ultimate tragedy of the Catholic Left, and the Left in general:  that liberalism is, on paper, the natural home of the right to life: a cause that is fundamentally an inclusive, civil-rights, hospitality-offering, expansion-of-the-human-family, and preferential-option-for-the-most-radically-poor movement.  But the dissident Catholic Left has sold its compassionate human-rights birthright for the pottage of their own carnal “freedom”, and the only compassion they will acknowledge anymore is one labelled with a big blue D.

1,906 views

Categories:Uncategorized

50 thoughts on “Answering Thom’s Question in Two Words

  1. GREG SMITH says:

    Joshua: Some of these ad hominum attacks on libralism are not the most interesting part of this blog. As for the Right, I note that the Republican response to the State of the Union speech did not mention Abortion nor did Bill O’Reilly raise it with the President in his “no subjects barred” interview before the game. The Tea Party people seem to have no interest in anything except lowering taxes (Signeficantly reducing abortion in the US will require a major investment of tax dollars) We should put or faith not in princes nor pundits.

  2. Ryan Haber says:

    Good analysis, overall, Matt. The Kissling quote, though, I do not think is quite true. Kissling is a quisling, “a liar and a murderer” and that must be borne in mind when dealing with him. He can can no more be trusted to present truth for its own sake than his master. Even if it is his experience, it is not mine.

    Most of the lefty/Fabian Catholics that I know (I am not speaking at all those who are not Mass-goers, whom I essentially count out altogether) are genuinely opposed to legal abortion. It is simply not a priority to them. Among other reasons, that may be because they are morally compromised by birth control. While some may be crypto-abortionists as Kissling states, I do not think that is true of all or most of them.

    Of course, I think there are plenty of pro-life Catholics who are also so compromised, but the sort of analysis it would take of a man’s soul to see why he is compromised on birth control but still holds fast on abortion, or not, is beyond any of our capacity.

    Your overall analysis is very compelling to me, and of course it is a truism that eugenics is alive and well. Nowadays, though, I am inclined to think that it is less strictly racial. It seems to me that our elites are perfectly happy to have some “minorities” among their number, and of course collaborating elites from other cultures are generally “minorities” (scare quotes because, of course, Indians are not minorities in India, etc). What they do not want, rather than blacks per se, is *poor* blacks. And what they *do* want, is power. Drunk on their own power over their countrymen and the world, our leadership, both overt and covert, are hellbent on remaking the world in their own image and likeness. A huge movement in the world believes that we must attain “population stability” at 1/2 billion people for whatever purposes – I don’t think they honestly believe in global warming… it is too ridiculous and useful a theory. So they push abortion, birth control, sustainability, homosexualist agendas (as opposed to genuine, legitimate legal protections on home purchasing or what have you, which are finished issues by now anyway), the feminist movement, and so on. They are drunk with power though – they cannot conceive how many people are necessary to make their own lifestyles possible. The loss of 11/12 of “those people” (us) over a couple generations to work for them and to buy their wares will mean that yachts and the like will become uncomfortably expensive, even for them.

    The inversion of the demographic pyramid, as we are witnessing in China, will mean that a revolution will not be necessary to bring their schemes down. And mighty will be the fall of it.

  3. Fran says:

    Two words? I stopped counting at 666 words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.