Exactly. We can’t mince the truth, but we should always be willing to tell it with charity. Nobody will listen to the truth if all the person telling it does is beat them over the head with it.

Beautifully put.

I adore Gabby and wish her a very speedy recovery. I admire her for not crossing the lines to suit others but has a mind of her own.

Kathryn: “Aborting Charity” is an awfully judgmental headline for your article. You apparently are accusing those who don’t get warm fuzzies over a 100% pro-baby killing politician recovering from an injury, as being “uncharitable”.  Wow.  Comparing Giffords to victimized women who are scared and desperate and feel they have no choice but abortion is disingenuous.  Gabby Giffords has deliberately and cold-heartedly sentenced innocent children of God (yes, these children are HER brothers and sisters) to the most barbaric and horrific deaths imaginable!  I echo the Twitterer who asked if you would rejoice if Hitler returned to work.  Would you rejoice if a guard at Auschwitz who dropped Zyklon-B pellets into the gas chambers every day, got shot and defied the odds and recovered…only to resume his grisly occupation?  I’m happy that Ms Giffords survived, but I prayed that her near death experience would change her evil disregard for the sanctity of OTHERS’ innocent human lives.  Time will tell, but in the meantime, I take offense at the “Aborting Charity” accusation.

Great post.  As a pro-lifer who often finds myself differing with other pro-lifers on how to talk to people who view abortion as acceptable, I very much appreciate this article.  Sometimes I get the sense that my fellow pro-lifers would just assume round anyone who is “pro-choice” up and send them to hell already.  I find that approach to be both sad and ineffective.  Thanks, again.

I was stunned as well.  Do we forget about loving the sinner and hating the sin?  Being appreciative of her wonderful recovery is not the same thing as endorsing her voting record.  She is a fellow human being.  Similarly, recognizing the dignity of a human being conceived by rape is not the same thing as condoning the rape.  Love is wanting what is best for the other -

Would they wish for her death?

Very well said. While I have many political differences with Gabrielle Giffords, She IS a child of God and what happened to her was heinous. I applaud her courage.

I think we are TOO charitable and too nice and that’s in part what makes people think abortion isn’t as bad as it is.  We have to stand up and say no this is wrong, and if she isn’t like a nazi, I don’t know who is.  If she isn’t like a nazi, well we ought to apologize to the nazis who were “coerced” or “mislead” into slaughtering the Jews.  By the way, the company that produced ZyclonB for the concentration camps is the exact same company (albeit they have changed their name!) that now makes RU-486.  Fun fact.

Yes, Karen, we are all TOO charitable and TOO nice.  The only way to let people know that abortion is wrong is to compare them to Nazis and tell them how evil they are.  Perhaps spit at them and write them threatening letters.  Or, possibly, when the time is right strike them hard across the face with a 2x4.  Then they’ll get the message that they are endorsing the taking of human life.  Oh, and if you aren’t willing to do that then you obviously are a closeted liberal who wants everyone to get abortions.

Also, I don’t think the author talked about apologizing to Rep Giffords, and I’m not sure why we need to apologize to Nazis.  I do, however, have the capacity to feel compassion for those Nazis who became so dehumanized and disconnected from their own humanity that they committed atrocities.  That’s different than saying, “I endorse Nazi atrocities and what they did is ok and understandable.”  Nothing will ever make genocide or abortion morally acceptable.  The question is how you go about letting people know that.  Attempts to do that without charity (see: Corinthians) will bear no fruit.

We could also get into how to define charitable actions.  You and I might agree that “charity” doesn’t always mean “touchy-feely” or “soft.”  To me, though, Kathryn is writing about true charity - the ability to remain in touch with a person’s humanity even while having to disagree with and/or correct their actions/speech (my definition).  There is no such thing as too much of that.  And unless you are willing to say that we must take up arms to stop all abortions in the name of defense of the innocent (I am not), treating people with respect and charity while showing them the reality of abortion is the most likely way to get people to hear you.  There is nothing wrong with telling Rep Giffords you are happy her suffering has decreased while telling at the same time that her actions are literally stopping beating hearts.

If you want to see what happens when one is warm and fuzzy all of the time toward serious sin, look no further than the homosexual issue. 

Perhaps if we were to publicly call sodomy and sodomites for what they are we would not have gay marriage signed into law by Catholic governors.

The same should be said for murderers.  Otherwise, we become so overly polite that the other side nods and grins politely as they commit their sin.  And we’re just standing there watching.

As Ghandi said,  “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”  Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Giffords back, or would He have berated her?

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” - Mohandas Gandhi
Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Gifford back?  Or would he have cast her out, berating her for her sins?

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” - Mohandas Gandhi
Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Gifford back?  Or would he have cast her out, berating her for her sins?

I think he would have welcomed her back, loved her, and she would be transformed. That’s a tough answer, though.

Let’s all pray for her conversion.  Given what she’s been through, I believe she would make an eloquent spokewoman for the sanctity of human life.

@Elise: “Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Gifford back?  Or would he have cast her out, berating her for her sins?”  Using this line of argument, you assume you know what Christ would have done, but do you?  When we examine the Scriptures, we know that Jesus ate with very public sinners of His day, but they were the REPENTANT ones - Matthew, Zacchaeus, etc.  Would He have berated her for her sins?  Probably not publicly - like the woman caught in adultery or the Samaritan woman at the well - He waited for everyone else to leave before talking to them.  In reality, He called attention to their sins and offered forgiveness and redemption.  We know the Samaritan woman took Him up on His offer, but we are left wondering about the woman caught in adultery.  Bottom line, we need to hold sinners (including those voting for immoral ideals and laws that cheapen human life and dignity), accountable for their actions.  We also need to be like Jesus, calling them back to life and truth through admission of their sins and reparation for them. I believe it is only through prayer, naming the sin, calling the sinners to reconciliation and offering redemption (and I think this is true charity) that we will overcome the evil in our society!

I think you are mistaken Elise it is Ms Gifford who is at war against our Lord and His little ones.  Certainly He labors tirelessly for her conversion.  For now is the time of mercy and how merciful He has been to her.  When He returns it is in Justice and make no mistake there will be justice.  Let’s pray Ms. Gifford finds His peace.

Elise, I believe He would tell her, “Go, and sin no more.”

Two thoughts: first, Rep. Giffords, in several really important ways, can legitimately be likened to Hitler.

Second: if Hitler, badly injured, returned to the Reichstag after overcoming a grave injury and greeted the servants of the Reich—both friends and opponents—with warmth and a few minutes of genuine Christian charity—however brief!—then Hitler, too, would be deserving of KJL’s praise.  This is the Christian message: no sinner is too great, no moment of goodness too small, that God cannot lift it up and harvest many fruits from it.

I don’t dispute the comparison with Hitler, though I’m sure that will annoy my Democratic friends.  I do dispute the attitude that Hitler is too evil to do anything praiseworthy.

Someone has raised the question of taking up arms.  I refer him to CCC 2243, especially (and perhaps exclusively) item #4.

Kathryn, of all people, you have no need to apologize for civility, nor do you need to justify your pro-life credentials.

Sheesh.  Have people never read Romans 12?

Keep up the good work.

In my book those who promote, advocate, encourage or otherwise enable the culture ( and this would include politicians) of death are morally more evil than some dumb female who rationalizes her own abortion. For if it were not for the enablers abortion would hardly ever happen. Ms. Giffords would be in this class.

Giffords ordered the murder of millions of human lives by her political power. What is the difference between her and Hitler? If Giffords can kill babies, what would she do with the power of a dictator? Maybe she doesn’t realize that she is intrinsically evil and maybe Hitler never understood that either. But this is no excuse to commit murder.

I would ask~ would a “Christian” not in name only, but a true Christian, devoted to God, and saved by His Mercy and Grave be able to abort their child~?  I would ask, how could they~? 
If God has taken up residence in you, you couldn’t, that’s the whole point~!

Good post.  We’ll be more likely to win them over with honey than vinegar.

Linda, Karen , and Ken…dead-on; bullseye.
As to some of the other posters, “Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Giffords back, or would He have berated her?”; well Elise, if she had repented, He would no doubt have welcomed her back, however, I sure didn’t hear any words of repentance.  We like to remind everybody of Jesus forgiving the adultress, but we just conveniently forget His words of, “go and sin no more”(!) This all being the case I think, yes, He would have berated her (read Matthew 23 again, and also reflect on Jesus knotting the cords He was soon to whip people with), and in doing so it would have been out of TRUE Charity in an effort to get her to recognize her sin and repent! (The same reason St. Paul told the Corinthians they HAD to excommunicate and even “deliver up to satan” the incestuous adulteror, Cor 5:1-5)
We tolerate sin, grave sin, and pat people on the back for having the “courage” to walk onto the House floor…give me a break! She was GIVEN a great grace and a second chance at redemption.
Courage is the Christian who looks at the gun barrel and says, “shoot me if you will I stand for Christ”; Courage is the mother who says “no matter the challenges, I bring to term the baby”; Courage is the rare politician who votes and speaks and lIVES in accordance with the mandates of Christ.
Kathryn, you attack the wrong people, and hold up for lauds the ones who have, and will, vote to murder God’s smallest children. Pray for her, but don’t lionize her. Do penance for her, but don’t make her a hero, while demonizing those who point out the uncomfortable truth.

Very well said, Kathryn!  A brush with death has profound and lasting effects.  Who knows?  Perhaps this whole experience will result in Ms. Giffords exhibiting a pro-life voting record in the future. It’s in God’s hands and we need to pray that His will be done in the hearts and minds of all His children.

It was horrible about what happened to Mrs. Gifford, but, the only difference from her “doctor” that tried to kill her and the “doctors” that preform abortions, is the method and the place. With her ugly “clinton” hair-do to the hate that she has in her heart for God’s unborn children shows just how confused this women (and others like her) truly are. Let us keep praying for her conversion along with all the others that have thrown God out of their lives by using birth-control which leads to abortion. Thank you Mrs. Lopez for another great article, even with that come-on headline.  +JMJ+

@ Kathryn - You are an amazing columnist who understands the dignity of EVERY human life - yes, even the humans who support the taking of other innocent human lives have dignity that we mortals can simply not take away. You deserve a very heartfelt “thank you” for your example! I am sorry you need to defend your Christian charity. @ Richard - perfect! :)

Nice speech Richard and some of the other judgementalists I`ve read here.
Fact of the matter is, it all sounds like the same left wing, liberal, progessive theological spin that comes out of CTU in Chicago and some other supposedly Catholic institutions that gushingly preach that it is
OK to vote for a pro-abortion politician in order to change the circumstances of those who would have abortions. This kind of thinking
and glorifying certain politicians is exactly what has caused so much confusion amongst Catholics. No it is not alright, it is a sin to vote for a pro-abortion canidate, ie: Cuomo in N.Y. I am grateful God heard our prayers and she recovered as I prayed for her and all those who were shot, and no I am not grateful that she returned to work and I would`nt applaud that. Tragedies happen, a friend of my son who worked with him in law enforcement was recently shot to death serving a warrant and left behind a young wife who just found out she is pregnant with their first child. He won`t be returning to work. The bottom line here is, lets seperate the two. She recovered and looks great. Wonderful. She is back
in congress, sad. Mercy and charity go with justice as the money changers found out when Christ drove them out of the temple. And Elsie, Christ would have forgiven her and told her to sin no more. Pax

From the horse’s mouth - so to speak - Luke 17

He said to his disciples, Things that cause sin will inevitably occur, but woe to the person through whom they occur.
It would be better for him if a millstone were put around his neck and he be thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.
Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.

“Would Christ have welcomed Ms. Gifford back?”

He would have said “Go and SIN NO MORE”.

The Hitler comparison IS fitting and we’d BETTER
never forget it.

In reply to Tom T. 
  This is purely a moral issue. Abortion is a death sentence just as vial as the death sentence imposed by the would be assassin~!
I can not fathom how a rational human being can abort their own baby under any circumstances~! 
Do we have the right to pick and choose what sins to commit and what sins not to commit~?  Sure, God allows us to choose what path we follow. He prefers that we follow Him in the path of love and fruitfulness~! But the flesh “if allowed”  will lead us down a path of poor judgement and sin~! 
If ever a doubt comes to mind about a choice to make, ask “what would God do~?” 
That is why God gave us a conscience…...so I say, can one truly be a believer in Jesus Christ and abort their baby~?  I say no~!

To the unimportant name. I don`t think you understood my post. That is
exactly my point. Murder is murder. I have been fighting abortion for a very long time with pickets, posts and contributions. The message that I am trying to make here is that Ms. Gifford`s recovery we can be thankful for because God gave her another chance. Her returning to Congress should not be applauded and in view of her pro abortion stance should not be idolized. After all, she had nothing to do with her recovery. It was the grace of God who gave her a second chance and who should be idolized. And
that was my point. The officer that was shot and killed wasn`t given that
second chance. So who do we worship? The pro-abortion politician or God
who gave her another chance? Pax

My bad Tom T. ~ then we concure~!

Hi Tom T.  Interesting given that you call me “judgemental” (guilty as charged - is there a way not to be?) that we seem to be saying similar things.  I don’t think I endorsed glorifying/lionizing Ms. Giffords nor voting for her.  I simply agreed with the author of the article - just because she is not pro-life does not mean we cannot share in her overcoming of dire circumstances, a very human experience.  I don’t think I even suggested we should be happy she’s back as a voting member, though I guess that comes with the healing doesn’t it?  Perhaps you wish she were still suffering so she were unable to vote?  My condolences go out to your friend.  I think many people can share in that experience, too, of grief for family and friends.  My point is, I don’t see that what we’re saying is much different.  I don’t disagree with anything you said.  I disagree with the notion that her dedication to killing unborn babies does not preclude one from sharing in her human experience; AND that those who would rather see her continue suffering or even dead in the name of the pro-life movement are misguided.  I guess I would take some exception to the Nazi comparison as well, but I’ll have to think more on that.

Aside from killing himself, there is apparently no evidence that Hitler personally killed anyone.  He did, however, direct his government to kill millions.  It does seem that there is an analogy.

More to the point, as long as he lived, Hitler had every bit as much opportunity for repentance as does Gabrielle Giffords.  Is she beyond the reach of grace?  No—not yet.  Neither was he, although there is no reason to believe that he ever availed himself of the opportunity for grace.

Likewise, any of us can easily become another Hitler.  Few of us will have either the precise temptations he suffered or the opportunity to act on them, and we mistake our lack of temptation for virtue.  After all, the sins I commit, ones that other people don’t notice or don’t care about—surely those can’t really be that bad, right?  Just try telling yourself that while contemplating a crucifix.

Adam’s sin seems so very mild compared to the sins of Hitler we know about—but Adam’s sin is in some sense a cause of Hitler’s sin.  How the two are connected is by no means clear except to faith, the same faith that says my own sins weaken the Church and corrupt the whole universe.  When the next Hitler emerges, will a decisive factor have been my sins, in some mysterious way due to the damage I have done to the Church?  Was I *supposed* to be a saint who would have prevented this new Hitler?  It’s something to think about.

Meanwhile, let’s keep Gabrielle Giffords in our prayers.  There’s still time for her; there may yet also be time for us.

I agree completely with your sentiments in this article Kathryn. The hard-liners in the pro-life movement are at once the dynamism and the downfall of the most important human rights issue of our time. We gain nothing by the rhetoric of condemnation. There is a reason that conversation and conversion have the same root. Condemning others wholesale prevents the dialogue that is necessary for people to change their hearts. And no, Giffords is NOT Hitler. It is shameful that we could draw such a comparison on someone who has endured such a terrible, senseless trauma. Shame on the person who made that tweet.

The book “Canceled: The Story of America’s Least Wanted” offers a twist to the critical national discussion of abortion that will blow your mind.  It’s available on Amazon and it’s a great read.

Howard, that post was awesome.  Thanks.

Richard,
  I think on the most crucial point concerning a baby`s right to life, we
both agree. But please don`t imagine that I would wish any harm or suffering or, God forbid, death to any person for any reason much less
because they differ from me in their beliefs. If I were not compassionate I probably would`nt care much about wether babys live or die which of course is not the case. I have no problem with sharing her human experience, thats normal and compassionate. But would I like to see her
out of congress? You bet I would, However there is a process for that. Unfortunately I don`t live in her district. And David Meyers, the pro-life people are very vocal because they are frustrated by liberal Catholics and theologians and bishops who with their progressive and
secularistic Catholics like to push their agendas by twisting and promoting end runs around Catholic teaching. I know, I personally engaged several theologians from Catholic Theological Union, priests no less, who
tried to justify voting for pro-abortion politicians because they would make things better for those who would have abortions. The church believe it or not is severely divided and the battles are for the very soul of the church. Good news is, quite a few of these bishops are gradually getting replaced as they retire, and Pope Benedict XVI appoints new ones such as Archbishop Chaput. Pax

I think the key is loving the sinner but hating the sin as the Catholic Church teaches us. Reading Ms. Lopez’s piece on Gabrielle Giffords does make me wonder if a pro-abort would see this as condoning Ms. Giffords’ awful record promoting abortion.
God gave her a second chance and her courage in dealing with her terrible tragedy is admirable but I think as pro-lifers we do have to infuse our charity with clarity about our opposition to anyone who promotes this great evil. Ms. Giffords has shown much courage but I am holding any gushing praises until I know that as a politician she’s no longer promoting abortion.

Howard…your comment about Hitler not personally killing one Jew but directed his government to make that killing acceptable is enormously important. I have heard it said that much evil in the world is caused by well dressed men and women in comfortable offices in positions of power. Signing papers or voting legislation that results in immorality,  in those comfortable cushioned boardrooms or headquarters, unleashes toxic “radiation.” We find Catholic pharmacists required to fill prescriptions against their conscience. We find Catholic county clerks having to process ‘gay marriage” licenses.  We find Catholic teachers in NYC mandated to teach how to use condoms if they teach Health. The laws enacted are making it nearly impossible to live in this society. Gabrielle Giffords, Governor Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg, with a stroke of their pens, are assaulting the consciences and coarsening the culture in a frightening draconian manner. Can I rejoice they are “at work”. No, I can cry and pray.

have you also considered that this abortionist : up and coming good democrat whom Obama has used for a photo op, having lost a significant portion of her noodle, remains in total synch and concurrence with the positions of other good democrats ? - that data suggests to me that there was not much ’ matter’ where the grey was supposed to be and hence I don’t expect her position on murdering innocent / helpless unborn would change even after a brush with her own mortality and confronting the Christ Face to Face.  To do that would require an intelligent brain, considerable courage and a dose of moral certitude, all of which are demonstrably lacking in this object of your past, erroneous effusive praise.

Re: Whether the women having abortions are victims:  Many are, in that girls or young women who become pregnant are often urged into the abortuaries by the boyfriend, or even by her parents!  If you feel that your survival economically depends on your consenting to have your child killed, you may succumb to the pressures of others, and, in effect become a victim. 
Help those establishing shelters for “women in crisis pregnancy”.  Lighting a candle is better than cursing the darkness.
TeaPot562

Having “a mind of your own” is a deadly ideal.

It is not logical at all to call anyone “Hitler” but the historical Hitler. Pro-abortion politicians are not Hitler, they are well-meaning, misguided souls. Intelligent debate will change minds, not name-calling or shocking ads.

a refresher on “judgmentalism:”  We are obligated, by the Ten Commandments and by civil laws, to judge actions and behaviors - and to speak up accordingly.  This is quite different from judging a person’s motivations (or heart) - we properly leave that to God.
I do not see that people on this post are judging Ms. Gifford’s motivations.

Kathryn, I think you were kind to wish Ms. Giffords well, however;  I also think that more should have been said to plead with her for a conversion of heart.  We only have certain opportunities to make a difference and that was yours.  Jesus is a just judge and as HE said, HE did NOT come to bring peace, HE came to bring division - Why?  Because some have rejected HIS truth and some have embraced it.  Unfortunately, Ms. Giffords has rejected HIS truth.  Softly telling her that you’re glad she’s back is not going to change her heart, it is going to keep her right where she is - Pro Child Murder.  The truth must be passionately told.  Praise God for HIS mercy!

Some excellent observations here.  And I think “Aborting Charity” is the perfect title for this piece.  The first and supreme law of the gospel and of the church is charity, including the love of one’s enemies. Our goal is to save lives, to prevent abortions from happening.  In the current situation, that calls for reasoned, intelligent persuasion of those who think otherwise.(Among other things—like being willing to care for the mother who brings her baby to term and then placing the child in a good home and so on.)  Being self-righteously pleased with ourselves for being doctrinally correct, despising those who are not, refusing to “pollute” ourselves by showing the simplest of kindnesses to those who support legalized abortion does not save a single life.  In fact, it may have the opposite effect.  Being nasty to those who support legalized abortion only serves to harden them in their position, and that ends up in more lives lost.  We need to ask ourselves:  Is our mission to save lives, or is it to sit back and feel pleased with ourselves for knowing what is right?

This was a hard, very hard article for Kathryn Lopez to write because she knew she was going to “get it” from those ever-so-loudly-and-self-proclaimed-“prolifers” who’ll praise any politician who files and/or votes for any piece of legislation that’s designed to knock out the very foundations of our social safety net programs which have indeed helped to reduce the number of abortions…especially during the Clinton years…it’s all on record. And at a time when states are increasingly looking into legal euthanasia and pseudo-“prolife” pols like those comprising the GOP House Leadership, especially Eric Cantor who’s gone on record as saying promise breaking will have to occur…we also have to remind some of our loudest chest-thumping “prolifers” that being prolife extends from conception to a death from natural causes, these people, not Rep. Giffords are the villains.
  You can’t have it both ways.
  Why do we support the demagogues who use the damn dog-whistle “Hey,he’s/she’s ‘prolife’ gotta vote for that pol, no matter whatever else the pol’s supports or doesn’t ... gotta vote for the pol who claims the ‘prolife’ mantle”?
  If Gabriel Giffords supported a bill that prevented a water-boy for the oligarchs like Eric Cantor from gutting both Medicare and Medicaid, thus preventing him from endangering your elderly parents’ or a disabled child’s life due to the loss of needed life-saving medical help that’d result of Cantor’s dirty deeds ... would any of you, and be honest, still go up and in the most vile language and gestures imaginable, berate this Congresswoman even after all she’s been through?
  Ms. Lopez myself, and a few of my fellow combox repliers have been given strong hints that some of you would. I’ll take comfort knowing now that the Church—as of now—is far bigger and more compassionate than the small-minded, but ever loudly hypocritical bunch of 21st Century Pharisees have tried to shape into a hellish ideal of their own making.
Allow me to put my concerns in a more secular context: Don’t Tea-Party Catholicism!
  However, IF this is the face of social conservatism in general, conservative Catholicism, (more specifically) and the Church as an institution, I’ll glady jump from this trainwreck to come and take my chances with a far more compassionate and less judgmental Father, Son and Holy Spirit under another roof, only this time I won’t be back so long as these reactionaries continue mocking Jesus with THEIR intransigence and overly pious hypocrisy.
  I was pretty tough on Kathryn Lopez on another matter. But when a writer is right on an issue, I’ll praise her works and let her good stand for what it is. The same goes for Rep. Giffords whose stand on abortion I don’t agree with, but I’ll be damned before I see her get so badly trashed as I have today just from reading some of these replies and not stand up for the good Gabby Giffords has brought to Congress, and nation.
  Is it too hard for our absolutists to manage this much?

Steven,
By all means feel free to leave the Church if you can`t or won`t live according to it`s teachings. You of course won`t be the first. They are
called Lutherans, protestants, calvinists etc. I knew an old Irish priest
who used to say “better to be a good protestant than a bad Catholic.”
Your spin and clouding and mixing of the issues is exactly the same argument used by the secular, left wing progressives who instead of leaving the Church want to change it. Sorry but it is not a Democracy. It is what it is and you either live it or leave it. Not gonna change for you. You sound like a die hard Democrate and it is really not about parties or canidates it is about life and I`ll tell you why you can`t vote for the likes of Ms. Gifford, it is because it is a sin. Sorry but that is the way the Church said it is. Not my law. Abortion is murder and a mortal sin and anyone who aids it in any way is guilty of mortal sin,
end of story…God Bless I wish you well and I hope your anger dosen`t
eat you up inside or destroy you in your sadly mistaken beliefs. Pax

Steven: The “attacks” on Giffords that you bemoan on this site are not personal. People say they are praying for her—to fully recover and to refute her abortion stance.  Sugar-coating abortion votes because the abortion-voter wants to pour government money to every entitlement program that comes down the pike won’t work. Jesus never commanded governments to enact entitlement programs; He commanded EACH INDIVIDUAL to give alms to the poor, to the widow and the orphan.                                  Steven: Let me ask you: If it was legal in this country for parents to walk their 2 to 6 year old children by the hand into a clinic, hand over $800 to a “doctor”, then watch while the “doctor” mutilates and dismembers and decapitates their toddler/child, what would you think of a politician who had a 100% voting record supporting this “legal child killing”?  If their votes on Medicare and Medicaid were in line with your thinking, would you still vote for them, because of the “seamless garment” doctrine, which you obviously buy into?    I’d love to hear your answer, Steven, because brutally slaughtering any child at any age is morally reprehensible—pre-born, post-born: equal in moral evil.

Steven: I forgot to ask you: have you ever prayed outside an abortion clinic?

@David Phillipart: Amen brother. Amen! EXCELLENT POST!
@Linda Ill: You said “The ‘attacks’ on GIfford ... were not personal.” Let’s see about that. Scroll up to this beaut by the person who has the nerve to use these initials “JMJ” and see for yourself:
  ” . . . It was horrible about what happened to Mrs. Gifford, but, the only difference from her “doctor” that tried to kill her and the “doctors” that preform abortions, is the method and the place. With her ugly “clinton” hair-do to the hate that she has in her heart for God’s unborn children shows just how confused this women (and others like her) truly are. Let us keep praying for her conversion along with all the others that have thrown God out of their lives by using birth-control which leads to abortion. Thank you Mrs. Lopez for another great article, even with that come-on headline.  +JMJ+”
  Yes, Linda, “+JMJ+“‘s all heart. Care to retract your statement about the attacks on Congresswoman Gifford as “not personal”? My! What would it take from “+JMJ+” or some of Tom T’s posts to change your views? BTW, does one have to pray outside an abortion clinic to demonstrate his bonafides? I’ve written plenty of prolife letters to the editor and guest columns in my extremely liberal home county and was one of the very few openly prolife employees at a Seven Sisters’ college so I’ve put in my time. I’m not going to go for the back n’ forth “what did you do in the war” stuff or wave my own version of the “bloody shirt.” At one time I was even a Republican but I couldn’t stomach God’s Own Party’s blatant hypocrisy. Satisfy you enough?
Guess what though folks, I’m NOT leaving the Church. But if the likes of any of the people who trashed Rep. Giffords so badly as I’ve seen here—only to then pray for her conversion immediately afterwards and even compare her prochoice political stand to Hitler’s killing of the Jews by proxy through his SA/SS goons and extermination camps—want to and are able to get me excommunicated/booted out, well, it sure as hell looks like the Church shrunk in more ways than one.
  Here’s one question I have, especially in the context of the aptly chosen title for Ms. Lopez’ article, “Aborting Charity;” Have any of you who’ve compared Rep. Giffords (and all other prochoice politicians) ... but especially in Gabby Giffords’ case, given thought to the fact that she being Jewish, might just have a different theological view towards abortion?
As if it wasn’t bad enough, (or for some, maybe “good enough”) to trash this brave woman, but to then pray for her conversion, and I don’t believe for a moment it was just related to her position on abortion, unless some of her more virulent critics have also be living in caves for the past year’s news cycle. A kindly old acquaintance once told me that anti-catholicism is the anti-semitism for academics, and he was a very well-known professor. But it looks like anti-semitism is the preferred choice of anti-ism of low-brow snd even well-“educated” (bookwise, maybe) Catholics, as it has been for thousands of years in various shades and odious degrees.
Looks like little has changed, and we keep finding ways to abort charity in more ways than one can imagine.
  And I’ll bet some of you are just proud as hell about that, if you appreciate the irony.
  I wouldn’t wish what she went through on anybody, no matter what his/her opinion was on abortion, whatever. But I sure as hell detect a strong whiff of the UN-AMERICAN “pol had it coming” attitude here.

I am the individual who made the succinct tweets to Kathryn Lopez. I stand by them. Kahtryn did leave out other tweets related to Rep. Giffords return work at the House of Representatives.

I made it clear that I was pleased with Gabrielle’s progress and wished her well. As far as her work was concerned, I said I would be happy if she returned to a job such as a cashier.

The point made was not that Gabby shouldn’t receive compassion for the trial thrust upon her - a life-altering violation by another human being - but that her SPECIFIC RETURN TO A JOB WHERE SHE WILL PROMOTE DEATH to 4,000 preborn babies/day is not to be celebrated. These two aspects of Gabrielle Giffords are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. Kathryn Lopez’s error was clumping them together…thus, implicitly (and publicly) celebrating Giffords return to prabortion work. Huh? Kathryn is prolife?

Yes, Celebrate Gabby’s victory in working hard in rehabiliation and making progressive strides in function and activities of daily living. But don’t rejoice (“gushing”/“niceties”) her return to a job predictably voting “YES” for additional preborn baby executions.

Kathryn would be correct to scold me if I were being uncharitable and unsympathetic towards Gabby’s trials and sufferings from a heinous crime committted against her by another. Yet, she must realize from very specific tweets that that’s wasn’t my intent.

AGAIN, I was unneasy SPECIFICALLY over Kathryn implicitly condoning and approving of Rep. Giffords congressional work - 100% proabort voting record. I would likewise be upset if Kathryn praised and “gushed” over Obama’s job as President (most proabort President in U.S. history). 

I’m sure Blessed Pier Giorgia Frassati understands my sympathies. May he intercede to help right Gabby’s discompassion for the little human beings at the front ends of their unique human-life spectrums. May she no longer randomly classify and demarcate when a life along that spectrum is not worth saving/living.

May Blessed Pier also help Kathryn to understand the concept of “mutual exclusivity”. It is an important tool to have as a Catholic and prolife journalist.

@Damien Cope

Steven,
You mention my post in your rant and misguided, obnoxious and ignorant
charge of anit-semitism. First of all I never once attacked Ms. Gifford personaly and even mentioned in one of my posts that I prayed for her re-
covery. Unlike you, I am able to seperate the sin from the sinner. Frankly
I never even knew that she was Jewish and really don`t care. There are many pro-life Jewish people that I know personaly. As for leaving the Church, I could care less what you do. Very few people get excommunicated
since the code of canon laws were changed in 83. The Faith is a gift from God, do with it what you will. You claim you have written in defense of
life and against abortion. I find that hard to believe as from reading
your profanity laced posts, I don`t believe for a N.Y. minute that you realize the gravity and seriousness and devestating effect of abortion on
both the mother and the dead baby mutilated at the hands of a greedy doctor with the permission and help from laws promoted by the likes of
Ms. Gifford. Pax.

“... Have any of you who’ve compared Rep. Giffords (and all other prochoice politicians) ... but especially in Gabby Giffords’ case, given thought to the fact that she being Jewish, might just have a different theological view towards abortion?”
  This sentence supposed to a reference to the blatantly and scandalously infamous “Nazi” comparison; hence this corrected and admittedly less confusing version: ” ... compared Rep. Giffords (and all other prochoice politicians) to a Nazi of all things ...”
  My apologies extend only insofar as the grammatical error is concerned.
  Are there any depths left to which some groups or individuals will not stop and say “On second thought, maybe this is going to far?”
  As each passing day goes by, I can’t help wondering if the American body/religious politik has shown more interest in becoming more creative in the “craft” of perfecting the “art” of the politics of political, civic, and even denomination-bashing-by-insinuation, if need be(!) beyond mentioning obvious differences, without the snide asides ...  instead of finding ways to putting more civility back in our discourse and Americans back to work.
  Americans are dying to find more work to keep the roofs over their heads and our politicians and their multi-millionaire, and in some cases, billionaires and multi-billionaires (on both sides) seem more interested in pitting us against each other through the clever use of one wedge (or more)issue(s) after another? Why? It pays BIG TIME to create a distracted public and stir up emotions and it’s as easy as a kid taking a long stick to stir up the wasp’s nest on his neighbor’s tree. Only the big kids doing the stirring up in this case are doing it behind their safety of their well-protected and gated communities while the rest of us are finding ways to keep the wasps from biting us over and over.
  Dumbing down our discourse and casually demonizing people we disagree with by insinuating/imputing “nazi”-like behavior to them is one of the oldest tricks of the political trade of dirty tricks. But does it really solve anything? Mull that one over. Really, mull it over and over. Yet, to impute this to a Jewish woman ... incredible; incredibly pathetic.
  Inasmuch as the Church and individually avowed prolife Catholics disagrees with her concerning abortion, and its related issues, Rep. Giffords has as much right to a view based on her religious (which happen to be Jewish) and other principles—just as we expect others who disagree with us and rightfully—but hopefully politely—ask them to get off our, or our pols’ backs when we insist upon being respected for voting up or down on this issue based on our religious and even (some very strong civic/secular and yes, economic)grounds.
  I can’t believe I’m even having to ask this. Have some of you also forgotten that among that deranged shooter’s other victims, were the fallen Federal Judge John Rall, who was unabashedly prolife and that little girl Christina who was raised in a solid Catholic family? For the love of God and His Church, I pray that none of you will even in the slightest way possible, insinuate, imply or give a nod, wink and suggestion, however coyly put, that they, too, “had to pay some price” for their longtime friendship and desire to learn more about civic involvement, respectively.
  One last thing, for the record, I’m not a Democrat. I’m an independent. “Democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders-style “socialist,” but neither Democrat nor a member of what I should’ve called “God’s Own Parasites” instead of “party.” I wish nobody ill-health, or to be shunned because of his or her politics, religious views, economic preferences, etc., and prefer that God alone does the judging of our souls. I pray to God that everybody working in an abortion clinic calls it a day (permanently) and walk out for good right now. But that’s not going to happen by yelling, name-calling and ripping into people.
  NATO prevented the Soviets from invading the West (militarily-speaking) but it was the prayers of the faithful, led and inspired by a Pope who stood up for the downtrodden of all ages and in all countries and from all classes, which, together worked in tandem to produce the “perfect storm” in 1989 to bring the Berlin Wall and Soviet empire down a year later. It was cooler heads, strong leadership and above all, prayers that did the job. It makes no difference whether or not the prayers are said outside an abortion clinic or in your church or private study. So long as they’re said. God wants our prayers, not our political bile.

@Tom T; you didn’t have to specifically mention anything about her religion to imply an anti-Semitic bias. BTW, where the heck have you been since it was well-publicized that she was Jewish shortly after she was shot. I apologize if you believe I improperly imputed anti-semitic sentiments in your harsh posts. But I’m at loss for words to say much more about your insufficient lack of information concerning Rep. Giffords’ political biography.
  Had you known she was Jewish, would you have ... given the awful history of those ever-soothing, but falsely-ringing prayers promised for Jews and other non-Catholics, by Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Christians offered the same kind of prayer, knowing full well you were taking the risk of sending off the same condescending messages they’ve received for the past 2,000 years after getting their teeth kicked in, moved here and there and within the past seventy years, almost wiped from the face of the European map?
  Like Anne Frank, I too, would love to have such innocent faith in mankind, especially when it comes to religious differences over abortion, whatever. But all of us have some historical baggage we have to sort out through our lives. Being Irish I tend to become more than a little leery (and sometimes testy) when I hear some of the more hard-line anti-Catholic evangelical Protestants tell me it’s a shame I’m not a “Bible Christian” and “we’ll pray for you, however.”
  However sincere, public prayer-calls for conversion can inadvertently take on a condescending quality, especially when there’s such a gap between Catholics and conservative Christians and (liberal) Jews on such a contentious issue like abortion. Worse yet, when these prayer calls show a glaring lack of sensitivity on the initiator’s part, whatever good that was sought gets lost in the dissonance that’s bound to follow no thanks to a lack of homework that could’ve been undertaken by those who are calling for these “prayers of conversion.”
  When a Jewish politician is “prayed for” because of her views on something that’s caused a lasting sore point of contention between prolife and prochoice activists and politicians ... that’s what she or her supporter’s are going to pick up a lot faster than any concer for her everlasting soul. If you believe what you’re doing is right concerning abortion, according to your informed Catholic conscience, how would any of you like to be prayed over as if they’re saying you’re harboring a deficient soul/spirit and never bothered to do your homework, notwithstand how many years you spent studying the precepts of your Catholic faith?

I don’t quite follow the remarks about Hitler.

Like pacifists or pro-lifers: vegetarianism is an ethic—not a religion. 

Pacifists refuse to kill during wartime.
Vegetarians refuse to kill during mealtime.

To put meat on the table, an animal must be put to death.

Vegetarians refuse to be implicated in the violence associated with killing animals.

Where do you think meat comes from?!

Like the pro-life ethic, vegetarianism has served as the basis for entire religions… Buddhism, Jainism, Pythagoreanism, and possibly early Christianity immediately come to mind. 

As an ethic, vegetarianism has attracted some of the greatest figures in history. 

The Table of Contents to Rynn Berry’s 1993 book, Famous Vegetarians and Their Favorite Recipes:  Lives & Lore from Buddha to the Beatles, lists:

Pythagoras; Gautama the Buddha; Mahavira;  Plato (and Socrates); Plutarch; Leonardo da Vinci; Percy Shelley; Count Leo Tolstoy; Annie Besant; Mohandas Gandhi; George Bernard Shaw; Bronson Alcott; Adventist physician Dr. John Harvey Kellogg; Henry Salt; Frances Moore Lappe; Isaac Bashevis Singer; Malcolm Muggeridge, and Brigid Brophy.

Do meat-eaters think of Susan B. Anthony or Cesar Chavez when it comes to vegetarianism? 

No, they think of Hitler!

According to Carol Orsag, in Irving Wallace and David Wallechinsky’s The People’s Almanac (1975), however:

Adolf Hitler “became vegetarian because of stomach problems” rather than out of compassion for animals, and “was criticized for eating pig’s knuckles.”

(a popular German delicacy known as eisbein.)

In a 1996 article appearing in the now-defunct Animals’ Agenda, “Nazis and Animals: Debunking the Myths,” Roberta Kalechofsky of Jews for Animal Rights states that Hitler “had a special fondness for sausages and caviar, and sometimes ham,” as well as “liver dumplings.”

Kalechofsky writes that the Nazis experimented on animals as well as humans in the concentration camps:

“The evidence of Nazi experiments on animals is overwhelming. In The Dark Face of Science, author John Vyvyan summed it up correctly:

“‘The experiments made on prisoners were many and diverse, but they had one thing in common: all were in continuation of, or complementary to, experiments on animals.

“‘In every instance, this antecedent scientific literature is mentioned in the evidence, and at Buchenwald and Auschwitz concentration camps, human and animal experiments were carried out simultaneously as parts of a single programme.’”

Would not a genuine reverence for life—showing animals the level of concern we now give humans—have had the opposite effect? Compassion for every living creature?

There is no evidence that vegetarianism (for health or ethics, etc.) will make people saints or give them Gandhian compassion, but neither is there any evidence that it will make people Nazis.

Isaac Bashevis Singer, who won the Nobel Prize in Literature, became a vegetarian in 1962. He once asked:

“How can we pray to God for mercy if we ourselves have no mercy? How can we speak of rights and justice if we take an innocent creature and shed its blood?”

Hitler’s so-called “vegetarianism” did not prevent Isaac Bashevis Singer from comparing humanity’s annual mass killing of 50 billion animals to the Nazi Holocaust.

In his forward to Dudley Giehl’s 1979 book, Vegetarianism:  A Way of Life, Isaac Bashevis Singer concluded:

“I personally believe that as long as human beings will go on shedding the blood of animals, there will never be any peace.

“There is only one little step from killing animals to creating gas chambers a’ la Hitler and concentration camps a’ la Stalin—all such deeds are done in the name of ‘social justice.’

“There will be no justice as long as man will stand with a knife or with a gun and destroy those who are weaker than he is.”

Hitler was a meat-eater and not a vegetarian.  Hitler thought Albert Einstein’s scientific discoveries were mere “Jewish science”—and thus not applicable to gentiles.  This is the mentality of meat-eating Christians toward vegetarianism. 

...an anti-semitic *yawn*, or pointing their fingers at their noses, snide comments about “work”, etc.

They think they’re exempt from animal issues, which they think are “sectarian” (like circumcision), rather than seeing them as a universal ethic (not harming or killing animals) for all mankind…as they view their own (sectarian?) opposition to harming or killing the unborn.

In a letter of Dec. 27, 1930, Albert Einstein wrote:

“Although I have been prevented by outward circumstances from observing a strictly vegetarian diet, I have long been an adherent to the cause in principle.

“Besides agreeing with the aims of vegetarianism for aesthetic and moral reasons, it is my view that a vegetarian manner of living by its purely physical effect on the human temperament would most beneficially influence the lot of mankind.”

Professor Henry Bigelow observed: “There will come a time when the world will look back to modern vivisection (animal experimentation) in the name of science as they do now to burning at the stake in the name of religion.”

Animal rights, as a secular moral philosophy, may be at odds with traditional religious thinking (e.g., human “dominion” over other animals), but this is equally true of:

...democracy and representative government in place of monarchy and the divine right of kings; the separation of church and state; the abolition of (human) slavery; the emancipation of women; birth control; the sexual revolution; LGBT rights, and all social progress over the past five hundred years.

In his 1979 book, Aborting America, Dr. Bernard Nathanson debunks a similar myth:

“Anti-abortion authors cannot restrain themselves from dragging Adolf Hitler out of the grave. A society that accepts abortion, we are told, is doing what the Nazis did when they killed off the handicapped, the retarded, the gypsies, and the Jews.

“The facts are these. The German Nazis had strict anti-abortion policies—for ‘Aryans.’ Jews were encouraged to abort, as part of Hitler’s racial purity madness…

“Strange that Right-to-Lifers do not make more of the fact that the pioneer in liberal abortion was not Hitler but V.I. Lenin, in 1920. The Soviet Union is not exactly one’s ideal of a humanitarian, life valuing state, either.”

Again: vegetarianism in itself is an ethic, and not a religion.

Excellent points. 

Abortion is the human rights issue of our time.

At the same time, while we have the truth on our side, hearts and minds are not changed by making the issue too personal against those who disagree.

Put the truth, the pictures, and the science out there, defend them forcefully, but also show wisdom in dealing with those who we wish to persuade.

We all probably know people who have played some role in an abortion at some point, and are probably hurting at some level, whether they consciously realize it or not.  The way to persuade them is not to tell them they are Hitlers.