First, They Took Away the Right to Life. Now Comes Liberty.

Vaughn Kohler has written a powerful post at the Gregorian Institute blog, called “Do You Believe Us Now, America?

“Pro-lifers have always understood that if you have no right to life, you have no right to liberty, either,” he writes. “The Obama administration’s contraception mandate is proving us right.” A key paragraph:

The “unalienable rights” of the Declaration are derived from our being “created equal” by a “Creator” who “endowed” us with “certain unalienable rights.” Without the first of these rights, there is no basis for the second and third.  Our liberty as Americans is based upon our identity as human persons.  We have been given liberty because we have been given life.

It raises a key issue that is also raised by the “accommodation” proposal of the Administration. In America, religious freedom isn’t something the government needs to “accommodate:” It is the ground the government stands on.

And the attack on religious freedom is not something new, it is the natural end of an approach that has denied the right to life for so many for so long.

Go and read the whole thing.

… and join the Memorare Army to pray for religious liberty.



  • Howard

    Yep, Obama and his atheist Muslim thugs are gonna kick down my door and arrest me for praying and being straight! Gonna happen any day now! Guess I’d better give more shovelfuls of money to the Church and vote Republican – it’s the only way to stop the apocalypse!

    • Tom Hoopes

      You’re right, Howard. Thank you for showing me what an extremist I’m being. So what, the government decides who gets the right to life and who gets religious freedom. What could go wrong with that?

  • AuthenticBioethics

    I am just getting done with my tax return. I would say the pursuit of happiness is long gone too.

  • Janet P


    This insidious evil has taken years to promulgate. It began its journey to acceptance and a “right” with this wonderful invention called “the Pill”. The toxic dose of carcinogenic chemicals meant to trick a woman’s body into thinking she is already pregnant…known,negative side affects are many. Today, in the current HHS debacle, the population controllers are screaming that women need them for their “health”. Does this suggest even a hint of logic?

    The outcry has been loud and swift in unified protest of this overreaching smack down of religious freedom. Where may I ask has been the outcry for unified outrage at the killing of the innocents over the past forty years of creeping acceptance of abortion on demand? Where has been the call to unified resistance to the measured implementation of laws, which have created a false “right” to murder? Where have been the cautionary warnings of the brazen transformation of terminology? Why, at every turn, in every conversation have we not been instructed to correct and replace those words with what our logic tells us to be true?
    Freedom is not “free” from consequences. “Choice” ALWAYS includes the right to kill. The successes and the determination of the word mavens are astounding when today the premeditated killing of an unborn child is equated with and included in the neatly packaged phrase: “women’s comprehensive healthcare”.

    The facts are sobering. That 54% of Catholics could be swept up into believing that this president could somehow be transformational and yet remain respectful to anyone of faith is disturbing. We knew much about this man, his beliefs, his connections, and his background…of course, we would first have found it necessary to choose to see the TRUTH. Unfortunately, this president was not properly vetted. We have a complicit, ideologically driven media, bought and paid for by the left, who no longer deems the quest for truth as part of their responsibility.
    We also have a hierarchical body of bishops who have been lukewarm in their delivery of the Faith. They put out confusing statements, in the attempt to not offend anyone. They produce a voter guide that is not explicitly clear and therefore gives license to vote for any candidate. Many have become entwined with the very politicians who (now) have turned on them only to put faith and reason aside for the quest of their own political ideology and power. Why have these brazen, consistently anti-Catholic politicians not been excommunicated? What does one need to DO to get excommunicated?

    The time for retreat even under threat of, (God-forbid) being labeled “uncharitable” if one dares to ask these kinds of questions from our bishops and clergy, is over. The awakening masses of American Catholics, whether they are the newly informed, the poorly catechized, or the truly faithful, (long been disappointed in the diluted doctrine and complacent leadership)…are ready for the fight.

  • tz1

    I would note that the Bishops not only had no problem requiring every citizen to purchase insurance from the local intrastate cartel, they actually gave their support to this. They call this “liberty”, or a right to health care, which means either I pay into a corrupt system or get fined – whether or not it pays for contraception, sterilization, or other thing.

    Your papers please…

    They want government involved in marriage, but not to define it in some way they don’t like.

    They want government to tax people, often for the benefit of rich oligarchs – but not them or the church.

    Having ignored or destroyed any thought of solidarity or subsidiarity, they then are bothered that the leviathan of their own making is not tame but wild is is biting them.

    Another post said he was “insulted”. Why? Every principle upon which liberty is founded, and the intellectual foundation of the social teaching (which is anti-socialist) has been conceded to Obama.

    Maybe the next compromise is to require the insurance companies to give to some other agency (e.g. planned parenthood) so they can offer “free” contraception.

    Or you realize the entire tree is poisoned, not just some of its fruit and you pull it out even to its roots.

    The evil is Obamacare itself, not some specific obnoxious provision. Liberty? That has NOTHING to do with the argument as Obamacare is destructive to liberty and pursuit and even life in myriad ways other than forcing the payment for contraception.

    I have to buy my own insurance and will have no catholic organization exemption so I will be in the same position as the Bishops and catholic organizations even if they get their own exemption. There are no plans to my knowledge to have a Catholic cross and shield in each state.

  • Marsha

    The “right to life” is defined by the Catholic Church as beginning at conception. There is nothing in our Constitution or in our Declaration of Independence that defines life that way. Attempting to force a religious definition on society in America is inherently un-American, in my opinion.

    • Tom Hoopes

      “With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life from its commencement to its close is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and in some cases, from every degree of danger.”
      —— Founding Father James Wilson, Signed Declaration of Independence; Framer of the Constitution; Early Supreme Court Justice —— We’ve learned even more about unborn life since his day!

      • Marsha

        Life begins at 14-16 weeks, which was the belief of some of the founding fathers, is not life begins at conception, which is a religious belief.

        • keithp

          “Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).” (Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2)

          “The development of a human being begins with fertilization…” (Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3)

          “The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.” (Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3)

          Apparently the concept that life begins at conception is a fact so basic to the study of embryology that it is presented almost on the first page of these textbooks

          “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed…. The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity.” (Human Embryology and Teratology, 1996, p 8)

          This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.” (Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2)

        • Curious

          Marsha, Ignorance is really not bliss. Educate yourself before sharing ignorant , made up and misinformed information. Do yourself a favor and find out when a baby’s first heart beat takes place, when the first brain waves are evident, and when the first feelings of physical pain takes place. You will then realize how ignorant your comment really is. On top of all that science, who made you God? It is God that creates life from the moment of conception, and you dare to place yourself above God as you discount His creation of life. Marsha, you don’ t get to decide when life begins. God does!!!!! God bless

        • sam

          Life begins at conception. If not, then what is the “conception” of if not life? Also, please define what you would call weeks 1 – 13?

      • Rodolfo Martinez, Jr.

        In property law according to the rule against perpetuity, people can have future interest in property from the moment of conception. All science books prior to Roe v. Wade acknowledge that life starts at the moment of conception, yet Roe v. Wade offered no new scientific discoveries or evidence.

    • AuthenticBioethics

      Laws have to reflect the reality of things. Laws cannot define reality in the sense of making things to become real. If a law fails to recognize when life begins, which is observable from the sciences, it is a bad law.

      A law cannot make a cat to be a dog, it cannot make marriage to be other than one man and one woman, and it cannot make a living human being to be anything other than what it is.

      • Tom Hoopes

        Marsha: When 23 chromosomes of the father join with 23 chromosomes of the mother to form a unique, 46-chromosomed individual, with a gender, a new life exists. Scientists act as if that is a child: There is a market for frozen embryos, and a desire to use these new boys or girls for experiments. …………….. To place the moment of life later at some later point arbitrarily is ideological wishful thinking, not science. ………………… Faith, as is so often the case these days is the last defender of reason against ideology.



Receive our updates via email.