Only in America can you be Pro-Death Penalty, Pro-War, Pro-Unmanned Drone Bombs, Pro-Nuclear Weapons, Pro-Guns, Pro-Torture, Pro-Land Mines, AND still call yourself ‘Pro-Life.’


  1. Jacki M
    February 13, 2010

    Leave a Reply


  2. Dave in Massachusetts
    July 30, 2010

    Leave a Reply

    I love that quote. As a Catholic, I wish every priest had the courage to read that quote from the pulpit, and then have everyone attending Mass state it back out loud three times to highlight the break between what many church goers say outside of church and what their own religion preaches.

    Of course, FWIW, the Catholic Church’s definition of pro-life is indeed, well, what Joseph Cardinal Bernardin once called the “seamless garment of life”. Included in the Church’s definition of “pro-life” are stands against the death penalty (except in very extreme cases that come down to self defense), against war, against nuclear weapons, and certainly against torture (we’re talking the modern Church here- not the Church of the Spanish Inquisition- let’s not go there). I don’t know for sure the Church’s stand on land minds, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to submit that the Church is against them, too.

    Thing is, no one – not even most Catholics, sadly, listen to the Church’s teachings on this score. Despite the Church making its stand clear in document after document, statement after statement, encyclical after encyclical, it appears that the modern world isn’t listening. Part of this is due to the Church’s credibility in recent times, of course.

  3. patz
    January 25, 2011

    Leave a Reply

    Late to the show. Saw your quote on friend’s page on fb. Much impressed. Thank you.

  4. Anchor of Life
    September 21, 2011

    Leave a Reply

    Actually, people not ONLY in America, but anywhere in the world, can consider themselves pro-life and still endorse legitimate defense because by definition legitimate defense IS the preservation of life. Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge.

  5. Miss Gull
    November 11, 2011

    Leave a Reply

    Yes, we are pro-life as liberal family. As animal loving vegetarian? How could one not be praying for unborn humans? But as long as social policy is denied and called Marxism: How can we help??
    Furthermore, a dog is a PERSON (of course, if corporations are!). I love to hear this, because our family always considered/defined ourselves “two people”! This is our liberation!
    I listen to the Sexy Liberal Radio daily. And as I heard about lesbians, liberating themselves even from being lesbian only: In our life happens a revolution these days! Our mother-child relationship as human and gull was REAL adoption and our little family are defending ourselves bolder and bolder. Adoption among different species in nature is normal and natural. To many people this seems inappropriate, but they can’t beat our arguments anymore. And we’re not hiding any longer in public.
    Well, this is what our blog mainly is about. I just heard you on the radio and had to put in our two cents.

    • Kim Schaller
      May 4, 2012

      Leave a Reply

      Miss Gull,
      Readers miss several of your points because of your poor grammar, poor punctuation and incomplete sentences.
      Try again, please. I’m not sure what you mean.

  6. Miss Gull
    November 11, 2011

    Leave a Reply

    It just occurs to me…. on St. Francis day we were in church and the gull got blessed ecumenically. But maybe we actually got blessed together. And now it’s revolutionary, spiritual blossoming. Until this very moment I didn’t see this correlation. It is about life.

    We progressives got to go out now and talk about protection of unborn human life! We can’t just fight for cats, dogs, birds ect.! But this has to be flanked by social policy and welcoming of any pregnancy — in- our outside of marriage. We have to welcome any mother and her child — above all if they’re vulnerable, because of psychological problems. But this isn’t the reality of our society and we have to change it.

Leave a Reply to patz Cancel reply

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=""> <s> <strike> <strong>